Member Info for Corryvreckan1

Nice that it was at a premium, shows confidence. Nothing to do with Trafigura though, that's just a historical reference to the purchaser.

NFTs - why have you started a new thread with exactly the same title as the last one you started, while avoiding answering my question about the AGM on the last one? Why do you think it will be in late August?

On the topic of Lanstead selling – you don’t know when they will stop as there is no fixed timetable for them selling the shares. It is entirely up to them when and how many they choose to sell, or not. Just as likely it will be phased closer to the monthly settlements and therefore run to October, or any other time. They will need to issue a TR-1 when they drop below 3% so your comment about “hiding” 35m shares is yet more nonsense, and “a different nominee” - seriously???.

I’m not even going to start on the flawed logic in your last sentence. Not yet, maybe save that for later ;)

Not a buy back, they haven't announced any new programme yet. I assume the last one hit the £25m total as nothing declared since 9 June.

It's the Uncrossing Trade (UT) from the closing auction at end of day. You can see a similar UT every day looking back, nearly always a little above or below the spread depending on which side the auction closed on. I can't really explain the process and I'm convinced it involves some kind of wizardry, but it's common on many larger companies at the end of each day.

It sometimes sets the tone for open on the following day though.

Good shout on Odey, they were trying to find other institutions to take up shares to try and keep an orderly market. They had 3.92% in Feb so would need to issue a TR-1 if they are now below 3%, may follow soon.

They have purchased enough to take them over the minimum 3% reporting threshold. Could have been just below that before though.

NFTs – direct question for you only. Why do you think that the AGM will be in 7 weeks? That’s late August, although you also suggested September. Why?

Have you forgotten that they changed the year end (accounting reference date) to 30 September?

Oh dear, NFTs

Standard Playbook (1) – after being called out, rather than accept the facts, and/or admit your error, just start a new thread and flood it with posts to try to bury the previous thread that embarrassed you.

Standard Playbook (2) – start your new thread with a deliberately negative and/or misleading title and then post something deliberately provocative in the hope that other posters will feel the need to reply and thus fill up the board with the deliberately chosen negative title (don’t do it people, it’s a trap) to try and sway the opinion / dampen the sentiment of anyone looking in.

*sigh*, ‘twas ever thus.

NFTs, 09:32 this morning:

“First Tranche of the 20 month agreement started in Dec 21 as per the RNS!”

Why are you persisting with this nonsense? As per thread below, this was completely debunked by 3 posters yesterday – Soupdragon, me, and … you yourself!

Soup and I pointed out the key parts of the agreement ‘as per the RNS’, i.e. the facts.

You made a wild desperate claim about 90 day credit terms that would, if it was true [it’s not], only serve to prove that the first receipt by NFX would have been in March 22 [which it was], not Dec 21, and thereafter run until Oct 23. You already trashed your own argument!

Crikey - I'm talking there as if they have already announced that it will definitely happen :/ Still "under consideration" as a possible thing to do.

There are some specific differences between what private limited companies can do and public listed ones, that maybe the chatbot won't pick up on.

That said, the second last para that it returned (regarding the MAR) may be key. As the BOD have not yet disclosed a total amount to spend on the programme, nor the dates it will run, then that could be considered as price-sensitive information that still needs to be disclosed?

Thanks for that Stas20. I have never seen any company start one without a separate notification so had wrongly assumed it was a requirement. However, given current shareholder sentiment, particularly regarding communication, it would perhaps be unwise to not notify it? (Albeit perhaps not commercially desirable to do so?).

They do need to advise separately in advance. Including the start date, end date, who is running the scheme, the total amount committed to it plus the terms under which they can / cannot buy the shares on any given day, etc. Some of that is detailed in the AGM resolution but they need to go further.

Can start it with just a day's notice though (pending an answer to WCSBcanuck's query about the Canada authorisation?).

"First tranche was December payment is 90 day’s invoice." - It's not, that's just something you made up. Commercial credit terms don't apply here, it's a legal agreement with a pre-agreed timetable.

Also, even it you were right [you're not] you have just trashed your own argument. If NFX issued an invoice in December [they didn't] then they would receive payment for it 90 days later, i.e. in March, under your suggestion [nonsense].

Then the subsequent 19 months receipts would still take us to Oct 23.

...

Sorry Soupdragon, was typing at same time as you posted. We have essentially said the same thing.

NFTs, today at 09:17

“For those that struggle with maths.

December 2021 was first payment”

It wasn’t the first payment - Dec 2021 was the first admission of shares. The payments didn’t commence until March 22.

Key paras from 14/12/21 RNS, my Caps for emphasis:

“The first Sharing Agreement (the "First Sharing Agreement") provides that the Company, in return for pledging the £330,000 proceeds from the First Subscription Shares, will receive FOUR EQUAL MONTHLY SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS as measured against a benchmark share price of 2.0 pence per Ordinary Share (the "Benchmark Price"). The monthly settlement amounts for the First Sharing Agreement are structured TO COMMENCE APPROXIMATELY THREE MONTHS FOLLOWING ADMISSION OF THE FIRST SUBSCRIPTION SHARES.”

[So admission was Dec 21, 3 month later is March 22 commencement, four month’s payments takes us to JUNE 22 for the final one]

The second Sharing Agreement (the "Second Sharing Agreement") provides that the Company, in return for pledging the £1,320,000 proceeds from the Second Subscription Shares, will receive 16 EQUAL MONTHLY SETTLEMENT AMOUNTS as measured against the Benchmark Price. The monthly settlement amounts for the Second Sharing Agreement are structured TO COMMENCE ONE MONTH FOLLOWING THE RECEIPT OF THE FINAL SETTLEMENT DUE UNDER THE FIRST SHARING AGREEMENT.”

[So commencing 1 month after June 22, 16 month’s payments from July 22 takes us up to Oct 23]

The share admissions and the payment schedule were never the same timetable.

Stas20 – yes, R12 at the AGM gave shareholder approval for up to 10%. It’s a standard resolution each year.

I posted a couple of days ago that I didn’t think it would happen soon though, despite the current sp being attractive for that option, although I now need to correct my earlier point about needing sufficient FCF.

My understanding is that for a plc the buy-back needs to be accounted for out of distributable profits / retained earnings, not capital.

Now, in terms of the physical cash available to do this, they could utilise the capital budget of £25m indicated in last week’s RNS, which would appear to be available to them well within the financial tests they now need to meet. That wouldn’t be a problem for a buy-back programme of up to the max 10% of shares (c.£15m total at today’s sp) and Majid’s comments yesterday appeared to support this idea as potentially more beneficial than using the cash for an acquisition.

However, I believe they also need the retained earnings position on the balance sheet at a sufficient level to support this. That won’t happen until the court approve the Reduction of Capital and it is then implemented by the company (in August earliest). The £6m retained earnings they had at end of May will be reduced by any UK losses applied, plus they will need to provide £3.1m for the October dividend, so it would perhaps be ‘prudent’ to wait for the RoC (£51m) to be approved before commencing a substantial buy-back programme, just in case there is any delay from the court?

Posted for discussion and open to challenge if anyone knowledgeable in this can confirm / correct.

LSE doesn't know how many 'buyers' and 'sellers' there are because the market doesn't report the direction of any trade. It's just LSE 'guessing' which it might be based on comparing the trade price to the mid point of the spread at the time of the trade. When there is a high volume of trades and when the spread is fast changing such as on a frenzied day like today, the LSE algo can't keep up so the 'guess' is unreliable.

And if the trade is bang on the mid point, or late reported, or a private transaction/transfer between funds at a price outside of the spread (look at the post-close trades today for a perfect example) then LSE will normally mark it as "unknown" and won't include the share volume on either side.

May be mid Sept for next update (6m to 31 Aug). They did issue one in this week last year (for 4m to June) but that was due a material upgrade to their guidance so an RNS was necessary. Now, if they can do the same again this year... :)

Yup, that plus no forward guidance on profit for FY24.

Whouse - I did think about it.

Last week's RNS stated that they hope to make the next dividend payment in October, not September. It will also need to pass the quarter end financial tests, so they won't be able to declare it until the beginning of October earliest. They then need to follow the dividend reporting timetable set out in the Stock Exchange procedures, so IMO it will likely be late October before actually paid. Closer to four months time rather than two.

Sorry to burst your bubble so early in the morning, but there is already a lot of misinformation around from people posting before they have had their morning coffee/whisky (myself included, so if this is nonsense as well I expect someone will be along to birch me soon enough ;o)