Member Info for Cranleigh

Oh, that Omimex - Cibra! Yes, fewer shares than CF - 2%!

Hello Scotman.

Gina is due to get some 203m shares - 4.2% of current shares in issue.

I don’t know anything about the Omimex shares you mention. What’s the story there?

Konan, you can get information about this from Reuters (a total only), and in detail from Morningstar http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-major.html?t=SRUXF®ion=usa&culture=en-US&ownerCountry=USA.

When I checked last week that suggested we only presently have 18 "major” (>4m shares) IIs on board, holding in total just under 24% of our shares. 15.9% are held by 8 US IIs, led by Capital; 7.5% by 7 UK IIs, led by Jupiter (whose shareholding on the SXX website is perhaps out of date); and 0.4% held by 3 European funds.

So if that is correct, 76% of shares are currently held by PIs, no doubt mostly in the UK (plus Jim Glickenhaus!). That percentage will come down a tad with the issues to Cibra and Hancock, plus any equity in Stage 2. But there is a long way to go before we match the average of FTSE 100 companies of around 10% held by UK PIs.

Canetois - so what is your view, and why?

And when you quote me “after Stage 2” you carefully omit “and as build risks reduce and production approaches”...

I agree with blacksheep - there is logically a slew of Institutions that will start building a stake after Stage 2 is done and dusted and as the build risks reduce and we approach production.

The attractions of a 100-year "wall of cash" will be terrific for the likes of income and pension funds. And the only place they will be able to get shares will be off PIs still holding them....

According to Morningstar http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-major.html?t=SRUXF&region=usa&culture=en-US&ownerCountry=USA we only presently have 18 "major (>4m shares) IIs on board, holding in total just under 24% of our shares. 15.9% are held by 8 US IIs, led by Capital; 7.5% by 7 UK IIs, led by Jupiter (whose shareholding on the SXX website is perhaps out of date); and 0.4% held by 3 European funds.

With all that liquidity, how about a completion bond or an agreement to pay upfront at a further-discounted price for some of their TorP volume, if we actually turn out to need the contingency cash?

I would think that due diligence on any South American company could prove “exciting”, and as the weeks dragged on and the wording about completion got vaguer I was starting to doubt this would proceed - which would have put a dent in the confidence of investors and prospective lenders, and put us back to 5.7mtpa while we wait for the European TorP/s to be concluded.

But no, all is well - transaction completed as planned, a secure route to market in an important region in place, and CF will gain valuable knowledge from his Board seats with Cibra of market reaction further down the supply chain than us.

Very happy.

The article to which you posted a link refers to the purchase of a company’s assets, to which different legal principles apply.

A takeover is normally of the company’s shares, so the target company continues to exist.

Stokey, when a company is taken over, its shareholders change, but the company - a legal person - continues to exist.

Its assets, liabilities and contracts remain unchanged.....unless any contracts have a “change of control” clause in them which the relevant counterparty/ies choose to exercise.

Stokey, I don’t know why you think the existing TorPs would need to be “novated” if Sirius were taken over.

We don’t know if any/all of them contain a “change of control” clause permitting the purchasing party to terminate the agreement should Sirius be taken over. I think it fairly unlikely, personally - more likely the other way around, if anything, ie if there is a change of control of our customer, who is benefitting from a discounted price.

I don’t know if we are all less savvy than Gina (in fact I can name one who is even savvier, if only according to him), but for sure we didn’t each have $300m to say we were willing to invest, subject to favourable terms, at a point where the company needed a kick-start for Stage 1.

Lata old chap, you are providing yet more misleading information.

“Piel” is feminine, as your staff should be able to confirm, so that should be “una piel gruesa” (which you don’t appear to possess).

“all the staff” - swipe me! It just gets better....

I doubt their technique is suitable for digging at 350m deep tunnel, Scotty?

We anyhow could use that Dutch crew (or at least, its work ethic) in Sevenoaks - new traffic lights at a crossing have so far taken 4 months....

I can’t understand so many not appreciating the balance that Casapinos, with his patently superior management and investment experience and knowledge, brings to this board.

It is very generous of him to spend so much of his time helping the naive hordes, especially considering that he has no shares in SXX himself.

But like Myo I do struggle a bit with his handle.

I have settled on it being a reference to a house he owns among pine trees, perhaps in Spain, boiught with cash from a tiny portion of the profits of his investments over the years.

I naturally ruled out that it was just an anagram of “a can o’ p*ss”.

Why not email them and the Planning Authority to point out the error?

Funding, though Fun dang sounds good!

Casapinos, I have no problems with the sums, thanks.

Had the company decided to raise £540m (your 3bn at 18p) when the SP was at 38p, how many shares would it have needed to issue? Under 1.5bn. That’s much less dilution and much less pain

And who is to say what the SP will be if and when Stage 2 is agreed on a conditional basis, the condition being that the company find a contingency sum of x, perhaps in the indicated $4-600m range. My guess is that on that news our SP might well be 40p.

And indeed who is to say that the company will not find alternatives among the 4 indicated options for fun Dang the contingency sum that involve little or or no dilution?

"At the present MC and SP a major dilution of say ,3 billion shares at 18p (cf 4 bill in issue at 23p) has less impact on existing holders than would have been the case with a higher SP."

Cojones

"let's get the pain over early and completely"

Dilution is not just for Christmas, it is for ever...unlike some of the alternatives that the company has said it will explore (your "other schemes that have been bandied about here"!).

All a bit rich from a non-holder!!