Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
I doubt that PP: IIs will be very keen to see proper FCF from operations (rather than investment or financing) because it's such a strong indicator of a superior business - one that can pay dividends, reinvest in growth or new areas, and pay off debts. FCF is just about the grail.
Look at what FCF has done for investors in big oil/mining/pharma/tobacco/tech - the paragons in those sectors have been awash with cash for decades and can't stop it gushing from their businesses.
....generated £120M of FCF last year
Wasn't this mostly from getting rid of excess inventory? In other words, it's prettified FCF since it's not from normal sales operations and was more of a one off - basically undoing the previous mistake of being laden with slow moving stock.
If the TU has weak points then a whack to the SP seems likely, but 90p? I'd be amazed to see that and hope you don't have to deal with that prediction realised.
To make it that bad, there'd need to be more capital restructures, or cash calls, or notice of appointment of specialist advisors, etc. Any of those would finish the management's credibility and require en-masse resignation. Things surely haven't got so bad so quick since results, & equity issuance.
I agree that too much is being pinned on the US facility: I can see it becoming an overall cost instead of an earner.
For what it is, it's taking much too long to establish, and this has already cost the company in steeply declining sales.
I think the crucial results will be in lost momentum and brand damage, both of which aren't readily quantifiable. Their customer base will have simply have moved on to something else in the meantime.
By definition though, if the price is changing, trades must be happening & a daily volume of shares recorded. The question that follows: who then is doing this buying and selling if most brokers for RI won't fill orders for their small retail investors?
I dunno about such a rapid reversal. More likely might be another cash raise or other tweaks to the capital structure. £75mn at such a high rate a few days after they'd said they were fine is hard to forget: how to trust a BoD that made such a large misjudgement?
It's the falling revenue that's knocked this so bad. Most retail managed to keep revenues static, but Boo's sunk about 20% in real terms. There's no convincing explanation for that generally or wrt competitors.
The prospect of profit with shrinking revenues is minimal and that's what the market is pricing. Even Asos managed to hang on to revenue better.
Weak grammar is forgivable, Carltt: it's infinitely preferable to the ugly, casual racism which you exude. Coupled with your weird concoction of lies about the composition of those posting, you're as tedious as you are odious.
Been nothing more than big-snooze for ages to me. Breathless, repetitive wiffle — they're craving credibility, yet are far far beyond even parody.
'The information on here is useless, suspect and should not be trusted.'
Kind of you to include a summary of your own hyperbolic rants.
That's a good question Jane on if a holding within an ISA/SIPP wrapper can be transferred broker-to-broker, without transferring the entire ISA/SIPP, and without losing the tax-free status. My Poly is with Jarvis and it's one I'll be asking them.
I searched for this a while ago in HMRC's info about SIPP/ISA and could find no mention of it in the rules. Perhaps more telling was that all the rules implied a transfer would be of an entire account. If it's not possible, perhaps this is where the restriction lies, rather than what brokers decide to offer, or not. I imagine HMRC need to keep tax free investment simple enough to remain manageable, and being able to 'split' holdings held within a single wrapper into multiple wrappers could be simply too complicated to allow. Mightn't be permitted on the grounds that it'd leave too many loopholes, and the excessive complexity it might lead to could provide opportunity for fraud or evasion, or even plain errors.
A cash call is often followed by another in the not too distant future, bit like profit warnings. Denial and saving face usually means businesses underestimate the amount they need (and this from a BoD that only a couple of weeks back said they needed nothing).
ASOS are burning through cash and that £75mn won't carry them that long. Feels like it's going to become a black hole where cash only goes in one direction - that of disappearing.
And yet their English is still better than yours.