Member Info for daramuda

Costs have further reduced. Sales have increased by volume. The key for me, leaving aside Gangama which corbine correctly identifies as being on time and within budget, lay under the headings within the RNS "Sales and Marketing" and separately "2016 Guidance". There appears to have been a dip in sales prices achieved in H2 making an average of minus 3% for the year. However there is an expected shortage in feedstock availability "over the next few years" and "customers continue to exhibit strong interest in SRL's high-quality product and agreements to purchase volumes from the Gangama Dry mine are ALREADY CONTRACTED" and in the next paragraph "pigment demand is anticipated to make a modest recovery during 2016" Under 2016 Guidance it is stated that 80% of the maximum volume of sales targeted for 2016 are already contracted and with the change to a policy of a sales led production plan for 2016 there will be a focus on profitability over volume - very much up my street. We will get what I believe will be a more transparent production sales and cost guidance with the 2015 financial results in March. I may be sticking my neck out but here I agree with ricky who recently considered that SRL is now being prepared fi=or the sale that Gibraltar has been discussing. Just my thoughts.

Thank you both for your comments. I agree with you corbs that there is top possibility. Gibraltar I looked at the 2014 accounts and the inventory year end (stocks of ilmenite zircon and rutile) stood at just under 50K tonnes down by 11K on the year before. Do remember that the sales prices in the year 2014 were depressed; we need to watch for the prices achieved in 2015. It is one thing keeping costs down which in itself is laudable but one must achieve good turnover. Corbs I do like your idea about storing unsold product for "better times"; that might be effective once Gangama comes on stream. We know however that sales prices have been coming down but there is talk (Gibraltar's recent FT article as evidence) that good quality rutile will sell at a higher price during 2016. What we do have is now great infrastructure and one hell of a deposit. Corbs I asked about the proposed power project. The chairman told me that the proposed partner could not raise the finance - therefore I would not rely on that as driver. SRL is undervalued. The shares are suffering with the downturn. I have ruled out any deliberate desire for Pala to get the remaining stock for a song and thus take advantage of the depressed resource prices which would hurt us because surely the remaining three iis should give us some protection and further Pala have a reputation to preserve. Finally the Chiese seem to be buying up this that and the other and could revisit SRL for a purchase..

is quiet in the current circumstances. It would be good to hear from him with his views given that he is possibly the largest private investor in the company. Whilst we have to accept that the sector is bombed out but SRL is a company with a good management, a highly developed mining site and customers for its high grade rutile.

That was a presentation of last April but be that as it may you are possibly right. Gibraltar has consistently reminded this thread that Pala invest in a company, inject their expertise and then sell their interest at a profit. As we know there was a third party interested in the company in the autumn of 2013 but terms could not be agreed. At that time the share price was much higher. Whilst resource prices have fallen since then nothing stays down forever and as far as SRL is concerned the deposits are large with a very long lifespan and the quality of the rutile is high. The questions that need answers are whether Pala will seek to agree an acceptable price with the three remaining institutional holders and then take one of two courses a) seek a buyer of the company at that price or b) acquire the outstanding stock they do not own at that price, take the company private and then later arrange an IPO to refloat the company. In the meantime we may well see the release of the 2015 final quarter's figures this coming Monday. One way or the other they will want a return on their investment both of $ and expertise.

Did not this gentleman sell his stake in TXR to Pala Investments in September 2010? I therefore struggle therefore to see his relevance at the current time. Perhaps Blackrod you could enlighten me.

The market marked it down because the market considers the idea pots and wonders why the board have to make such a move. We will know more when we see the last quarter's figures.

Gibraltar - I think that your price target is a tad over optimistic. On the one hand if there were a third party offer Pala would want a maximum price,on the other hand if Pala were to make an offer themselves it will be as low as possible so that Pala can gain the maximum on a following IPO. Pala's own website prides itself in gaining a return on average from those companies in which they invest and give their expertise is 3X and given the fact that some time ago you agreed with me that their average purchase price over the years has been circa 15 pence, 45 pence for me would be the bottom of the range. Therefore anything above 45 pence per share for us lowly private investors would be a bonus. To my thinking 45 pence is the basement price for a take out. Even at that price the current valuation is an under value.

Someone taking advantage of the low price to take some off the table?

Whilst I cannot disagree with Gibraltar's view I was looking at alternatives to get the share price moving. With a world class asset, costs very much under control, debt earmarked for specific tasks (no over gearing), increased production from Q2, an argument not restricted to titanium that commodities have either bottomed or will do so in the short term, Sierra Rutile is well placed. It is in marked to some majors which are slashing debt and costs and closing mines and minors which are putting projects in mothballs. For those reasons Sierra Rutile is undervalued. We await the final 2015 quarter's figures in early January.

Thank you for post the link to the FT article. Sisay had his say!! Gibraltar1 has been arguing that either Pala would get together with the institutional holders to see what they would accept (the first limb) and then find a third party to buy the shares that they do not own (institutions, board members and us) or having achieved the first limb make an offer to them and us. I have offered and alternative argument that value may be achieved by a dividend being declared if of course the company is in profit this year or in the further alternative in respect of the year 2016 . Sisay in various recent presentations been arguing that SRX are seeking to get to the position of a sustainable dividend. Let us see if he and the board can do it with decreasing costs per tonne and increasing turnover. A dividend would give us a yield and be reflected in a higher share price.

for tomorrow's edition do you think?

I have left the office where we take the FT; any more detail from that article? and what the UK companies are hunting for?

and games with trades today - movement of stock within a fund? The promised drive by Numis to advance the share price has not exactly worked out if at all.

Did some research today and found on a comparison of the company website against the annual report that Neon had increased their stake since the 31.12.14 by almost one million shares. A third reduction in target price by Investec (also our Nomad) in short order (I have not come across so many reductions by a brokerage in so little time before) would make some think that the share price anticipation is being dumbed down for some reason or Investec's analysts do not know what they are doing from week to week. I would like to think that our remaining institutional investors hold out for a decent price if there is an attempt to buy them out. It seems that Neon do not seem perturbed. Good value here - let us make sure that we get our fair share.

Japanese argument is now imo closed. Nothing in the CCN and Sky interviews not already known save that all airlines save BA now flying to and fro SL. The rutile price has arguably bottomed and if Sisay is right will start increasing late 2016. The next milestone after the January Q4 figures and then the full year results is the commissioning of the Gangama mine and ramping up of production. Numis appear to have achieved zero - certainly zero to improve the sp. I sense funnies going on in the background -pis buying one day with X selling the next. I wonder if Gibraltar will be proved right that Pala will pounce. With the recent and forthcoming developments the stock seems very undervalued.

Although Gibraltar1 may not agree with this possible development you could read a post by forwardloop on proactive investors dated 18 June 2015 with the attachment which is an interview with J Sisay. The one thing which is certain is that Pala will seek a good return on their 4 year investment and that hopefully will touch on ours.

40,268 at .2235 pence.

I have seen old stories being peddled with another stock on the past. One would be forgiven for thinking that that old story together with investec's Friday downgrade in its target price with its buy recommendation there is some support to cynically argueargue that the iis should not set their sights too high. Odd in that solicitors, barristers, accountants in private practice, doctors must all avoid conflicts of interest but here is dear old investec previous holder for several years appearing to sell, no announcement when they went below 3% and then appearing as nomad. All that coupled by me feeling that the Q3 result was very good but year end result will only be at the mid to higher end of governance when I thought that historically the final quarter for SRX was normally a good quarter. Perhaps I am getting too cynical in my old age. I am around to your way of thinking that the attempt to get a sell out of its stake has turned to becoming a buy for the who;e of the company and then mothball followed by an IPO. If that is right we will have to see if the iis are resilient.

I have to say this Bloomberg article seems left of field or whatever the expression is. I cannot see it or understand it. Has anyone got a view?

If you google the above there is an article. I do not know whether the article has veracity.