RE: LSE presentation - of a kind...........12 Jul 2019 12:51
I'm not really interested in what you think, a1m1. It's reasonably clear you don't know the first thing about long term value creation/destruction and are fixated only on short term price.
My dissatisfaction is around the fact the people Algy Cluff left in charge have behaved deplorably by seeing themselves alright, after swamping the market with more than double the existing number of shares in issue - at 10% of the value attributed to them by the Company's own NOMAD and broker (Allenbys) a month beforehand.
P2437 is described by some as an 'appraisal' drill (given gas has already been discovered) although it is an exploration drill with a CoS put at 39%. In these circumstances would it not have been preferable to raise only enough (when it must have been clear to anyone with half a brain that the share price was being played) to provide the minimum working capital needed to sustain the Company for, say, another 18 months, plus enough to pay P2437 drill costs? Not if you want to guarantee your excessive packages for 3 years
There are other licences to farm out - cash could easily feature in the farm in cost to interested parties. GS was ceo throughout the discussions with Shell - how come other oil and gas juniors manage to get free carries on drill costs, but not CLNR, when it's farming out licences to a major that knows its prospective partner has very little cash?
Why (as someone with a background in finance) did GS not take action, knowing what was likely to be happening with one or more of the licences, to move CLNR's shares out of penny traders' favourite range - a 1 for 10 consolidation would have served the purpose and benefited longer term holders. 55m shares wouldn't have caused liquidity problems; the move would have created interest and provided meaningful uplifts when positive news was announced.
Locking in so much of an under-valuation by more than doubling the number of shares in issue has severely restricted the upside potential for existing investors who saw CLNR as a long term value play. Short term price rarely interests me, but it does when the wrong value is locked in permanently by people who are not only not very good at what they do, but take steps that further disadvantage long term shareholders who paid for their shares and shown willing to accept the risks involved - when the directors have not. The issue of a further 20m share options each to the two executive directors at a soft exercise price (to add to the bucket-loads they already hold) is imv deplorable. It shows exactly where their priorities lie, which is in looking after themselves first.
I only back companies where I trust the calibre and the integrity of the people running the show. I was never confident in GS's abilities either as an accountant or as a business leader. I didn't expected Algy to remain involved to provide guidance and advice when needed. He didn't. Tough
No point saying more - we all apply different standards
dyor