London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

My understanding is no one knows, it requires speculation at this stage….from 1 min

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1blHdHjCCyI

from your rns link

"The final, balancing payment ("Final Invoice") will be paid on delivery to Japan, subject to the quotation period as per the terms of the Offtake Agreement, which is defined as third calendar month after month of arrival in Japan. The Final Invoice will consist of the remaining 10%, plus or minus any commodity price changes to the Advanced Payments made, less accrued interest."

Incidentally…

Just some working that helped me recently rationalise a decision on another share, which luckily worked out pretty well soon after. Not aimed at any poster here just posting to record for me to look back at and in case it is of any interest to any on looker (applied to pere prices).

Maths of averaging down

Example figures only…
“this would have to go up 10 fold to pay me back” reminded me how I felt recently elsewhere.
Say holding worth £500 currently so originally £5000 outlay (10 fold)
Works the same no matter price of each share so use easy figures
1000 shares for £5 each was original constituant outlay of £5000
Same/current holding of 1000 shares worth £500 due to sp movement etc down to £0.50
Uses PERE sp of 3.125p and ignores spread (looks slightly better than in practice)

1.Reduction of average using 25% increase in risked capital
25% of 5000 is £1250
Use this to buy share at current price of £0.50 acquiring (£1250/0.50) 2500 more shares
Now hold 3500 shares at average price (£6250/3500 shares) of £1.86
Using 25% extra risked capital, break even sp reduced by 62.8%
From needing “10 fold” (31.25p) now need an 272% sp rise to break even or PERE sp of 11.63p

2.Reduction of average using 50% increase in risked capital
50% of 5000 is £2500
Use this to buy share at current price of £0.50 acquiring (£2500/0.50) 5000 more shares
Now hold 6000 shares at average price (£7500/6000 shares) of £1.26
Using 50% extra risked capital, break even sp reduced by 74.8%
From needing “10 fold” (31.25p) now need an 152% sp rise to break even or PERE sp of 7.88p

3.Reduction of average using 100% increase in risked capital
100% of 5000 is £5000
Use this to buy share at current price of £0.50 acquiring (£5000/0.50) 10000 more shares
Now hold 11000 shares at average price (£10000/11000 shares) of £0.91
By doubling risked capital, break even sp reduced by 81.8%
From needing “10 fold” (31.25p) now need an 82% sp rise to break even or PERE sp of 5.69p

AIMO GLA

1/2

Co's sell assets/chunks of assets for all sorts of reasons and just because a sale seems low 'priced' at time of occurrence doesnt mean great value cannot be extracted from it by another team/at a later date/under different macro conditions etc. Nor does yesterday EEE rns quantified consideration necessarily represent the magnitude of value Artemis will realise from the sale of this chunk of the asset.

First read through rns yesterday evening and first impressions conjured memories of 2019 Jangada sale of majority of Pedra Branca to Valore. Very different deal in many ways including reasons behind need for the deal and terms, but some similarities within the deal in terms of vendor asset exposure preservation, superficially low consideration and significant exposure to purchasing Co. I too am very interested to see what this team can accomplish within a less hindered backdrop (hopefully). I posted my thoughts on that deal 29/05/19, here EEE is in the place of VO (imo - getting the better side of the deal (since the deal announcement I bought into both JAN and VO and my pf now contains several different Co's with PGE exposure)).

As an existing EEE holder and great believer in the quality of the Georgian assets I was aware of the preference to diversify but also pleasantly surprised at the late stage of the resource definition, jurisdiction, and commodity exposure in combination when compared to outlay. Vendor seems to see/have value/faith in the team and EEE.

Deal makes a lot of sense both in the commonalities and the differences compared to Georgia.

Commonalities include, a lot of the work has been done, involvement/continued interest from Co who previously worked on the asset, nearby & ownership linked processing, licenses in place, project of very significant size/upside potential.

Differences include, principle commodity exposure now also diversified and very significantly, better jurisdiction, target percentage ownership/control (above 50:50).

Things that are great about Georgian venture maintained whilst there is clear attempted improvement with respect to areas of difficulty heretofore experienced.

AIMO

2/2

The good thing about kefi is that their stratergy has prevailed and has a chance to come good (still trading/still progressing same asset/s). Meaning that very significant progress has and continues to be made toward value realisation and the unluckiness of the jurisdictional issues (S of E's etc) and the 2016 pm head fake may now be out balanced by the timing in relation to covid19 induced central bank and governmental mgmt of fiat currency. These entities also appear to be using a similar strategy of 'caution to the wind' in terms of dillution (of fiat purchasing power, and in all 3 big capital pools at once – usd/euro/yen) just at the time where kefi meaningfully begins its transition from explorer/developer to near term producer/producer of the most historically demonstrable preserver of purchasing power.

This transition is historically the most value accreting for a mining company especially when the transition coincides with a bull market in the underlying commodity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SW96tD9Kdg

Running rough calculations on the npv for TK looking forwards to when production can be reasonably expected and imagining/specualating re the concurrent POG as 2k to 3k usd results in exciting potential especially combined with exploration upside both in Ethiopia and SA.

Raising money in a bull market is very different and results in very different dilution effects and sp movements when compared to those, likely, most here are used to.

Placings at higher and higher sp, accreting more and more incremental value (my 1st post 18/10/19).

All he has to do is carry on as he has and the sp will go up and go up a lot, imo. He has done (and said) what he has had to once the decision to progress (justify salary of size) was made, it has not made him popular, but it is what it is and hopefully things are turning more favourable.

Continued progression is now the key and at some point soon (I think very soon) sentiment here will shift dramatically.

Discl - stake initially <500 at around 4.5p H1 2017, stake now >8k av <0.9p holding 1m, now all in ISAs.
Hopefully look back on these thoughts and actions in a positive light one day.

AIMO GLA

1/2

Zooming out as someone who has held and 'suffered' (since 2017 - 4.5p ish) high level of dilution of initial stake.
My post 11/06/2018 “This has been a bottom of the page languisher for too long-finally back at break even, shoulda woulda coulda averaged down, had plenty of opportunity and considered many times-just lost track and thought I had more time. Hey ho looking forward to bluer times ahead now major hurdle overcome. GLA”

I see what HAA has achieved during an extended bear market, made worse in a sense by the 2016 head fake and subsequent return to tougher times for gold - TK construction ready/in progress and largely funded as very impressive.

Broadly speaking from my observations of other mining companies in my pf there a two strategies for exploration/development in bear/weak markets.

Continue advancing in hope of short term return of better times - pm bull market, this almost inevitably leads to significant dilution due to difficulty raising funds in a poor sentiment backdrop. Elongated tough times & or micro catalysts can turn significant dilution to massive to oblivion territories.

Or

Do very little until money can be raised at levels that minimise dilution to existing investors.

Formally early investors can get essentially wiped out but progress towards value realisation - e.g. production or sale is achieved (hopefully significantly and successfully).

Latterly dilution almost invariably occurs due to basic working capital requirements - listing costs etc but is minimised and company is kept in stasis awaiting an upturn. Here little or no significant progress towards value realisation is achieved.

Obviously these are simplifications and company strategy is often a partial mix of the above.

When scaling in and paying closer and closer attention to mgmt decisions and actions I find it becomes clear which camp they favour. Checking historic news prior to any financial risk also provides evidence.

With HAA and kefi the strategy is very clearly one catered towards progression with 'caution to the wind' in terms of dilution.

I lucky awaited better times (I believed pm bull market very close to confirmation) before significantly scaling up my risk here. My initial stake is now completely irrelevant to the outcome of my speculation, as a whole, on the future sp of kefi.
My post 21/10/2019 “Hoping today is one of the best to av down, first bought early 2017 around 4.5p (after watching it drop for months), back then never imagined picking up any where near this amount of shares.GLA”

AIMO

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for Dave85

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)