Our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode with QuotedData's Edward Marten has just been released. Listen here.
once the TBS results are out, then wouldn't it be a good idea for SP Angel to be commissioned to do a research note.
as others have pointed out, First Equity used a graphite price x5 lower than what it is today. You can infer into that what you like. The most important figures are for what you think we'd get for it over the life of the mine.
quite so I agree. Its a rough but conservative valuation. I would also point out that First Equity used a method of valuation that does not acknowledge the presence of existing workings. Previously used mines are valued differently.
For an accurate valuation then some more information would be needed such as timescales (which Steffan has illustrated) and capex (including timings of) required. It is entirely possible of course that an offtake agreement or some other funding arrangement may emerge in the meantime , as Steffan is clearly actively pursuing this. I am impressed by the parallel nature of his activities and vigour of his approach.
Bernard and Strache in 1916 estimated a resource of 200,000 to 495,000 tonnes at
an average grade of 20% graphite based upon surface and underground mapping
and trenching work, although this is unlikely to be based upon any drill core results.
A “Review of potential resource critical minerals in Greenland – MiMa report” in 2016
First Equity Research Note
Based on this was a valuation of £2.5M
so assuming 0.495 M tonnes
now 4.7M tonnes inferred and measured
roughly 10x£2.5M = £25M
GROC shares in issue 119 M
Amistoq contribution to fundamental value per GROC share £ 25/119 = £ 0.21 = 21p
ALBA own approx 60 M GROC shares
fundamental present value of Amistoq £0.21 * 60M = £12.6M
the above per ALBA share £12.6 M / 7126 M = £ 0.00177
= 0.177 p
that's amistoqs fundamental contribution
at the time of writing ask 0.14 p
Bernard and Strache in 1916 estimated a resource of 200,000 to 495,000 tonnes at
an average grade of 20% graphite based upon surface and underground mapping
and trenching work, although this is unlikely to be based upon any drill core results.
A “Review of potential resource critical minerals in Greenland – MiMa report” in 2016
First Equity Research Note
Based on this was a valuation of £2.5M
so assuming 0.495 M tonnes
now 4.7M tonnes inferred and measured
roughly 10x£2.5M = £25M
GROC shares in issue 119 M
Amistoq contribution to fundamental value per share £ 25/119 = £ 0.21 = 21p
@Robbie .... with respect to NRW, if there is a commercially backed opponent to ALBA bringing Clogau into production then they may try to fund a campaign for a judicial review. What we need is the BOD to make a bold assertion that they will make Clogau St Davids the main project, no matter what, even if that means the disposal of their GROC holding in time.
Anyone not interested in that, be big boys take the punch in the face, crystalise your losses and buy into GROC
NRW have already stated that the minewater quality itself is not an issue
We do have to ask questions of our environmental consultant about not including a HRA
Things may have changed since I was in geotechnics, but the mantra of the day, is that project sponsors reponsibility to assess the environmental impact of their project, and it was the NRW (it was a different named authority those days) that checked through it to check that it complied with the regulations. Why on earth this should take so much time baffles me. "lots of data" .... we're not expecting NRW to type it all in !
@butchers
I have not posted on share no profits. My analysis and thoughts are my own. I'm sorry if the post was too long for your liking, I dont think there is anything superfluous in it. I do correct one statement you made in your own post "sell limerick", there is nothing to sell, it has been surrendered. It is a total loss.
@butchers
Limerick - I think it is a poor decision to surrender the Limerick licence and the reasons given are not in the least bit confidence inspiring. 1. to save the money on exploration - indicates that the company either is so cash strapped that the 50k a year of exploration expenditure is too much of a burden on the group as a whole, a cash strapped situation or 2. they have already concluded that the exploration will not amount to a viable resource. Given the few holes and the results to date then that is the least likely. Let us be clear, surrendering the licence does not mean that there is a residual licence to sell on, it means that there is no asset to sell on, other than perhaps the borehole logs. In either case it is a very poor indicator, especially in the light of the 300k soft loan that was thrown at HH after the successful Nov placing of a couple of years ago.
Horse Hill, the equity stake of HH is known, however what is not as readily available is the amount of loans that ALBA has given to Horse Hill Developments Ltd. As I understand it, then the terms are very loose indeed, no repayment date, unknown interest rate (if any) so in an inflationary environment then the value of that loan (more like gift) melts by about 10% a year. The production rates achieved at HH seem to be clouded in mist and released selectively to the extent that the most reliable indication are pi living locally counting tankers. This is not the level of transparency that I would expect from a publicly listed company.
A disposal of our equity interest in HH and repayment of our soft loans (or sale of those same loans to a buyer) would be a most welcome move, providing a great deal more cash to fund Clogau and perhaps participate in GROC placings in the future.
NRW have stated that they will not be bound by their service level timescales for the resubmission. Who else has worked in such an environment ? How long do you think I would last in my job if a captain asked me for a lengthy passage plan and to have it ready by the next tide and I reply, you'll get it when I'm ready ? The implications for us, is that we are unable to gauge a timescale for this most critical of events.
If ALBA feel unable to fund Limerick then I will be most displeased to learn of any aquisitions, given the very slow progress it would lend credence to a view that the company is using "jam tomorrow" to attract investment sentiment.
Eat what's on your plate ..... demonstrate some capacity to get a project over the line ... any line
@Mullins58
yes, I agree with your assertion that US has no means of production of natural graphite. However synthetic graphite can be produced from petcoke. To what extent natural graphite is
1. cheaper than
2. more available in the demanded quantity
3. can produce an acceptable quality
are the first questions
If all the above are met, then there is the question of inertia in the supply chain, i.e. the resistance to change for the better due to existing contractual commitments , confidence in the existing supply chain, the relative cost saving that can be made.
I still think 0.9p is a fair valuation based on my analysis 2 years ago.
In the meantime
HH got worse
Amistoq got a lot better
Structure of Clogau got better, regulatory environment has paused progress and introduced more risk, however a successful outcome will have implications beyond llechfraith.
It's a cautious strong buy, but speculative, highly speculative.
Downside protected by groc
Morocco. It is entirely possible that much that should be released is subject to non disclosure agreements. Personally I view nda as incompatible with the proper conduct of a public company. I would support shareholders resolutions banning the bod from entering into them. 5% shareholders need to propose such an proposed resolution before next agm.
I'm getting well fed up with the bods poor communication and poor performance in meeting any targets. No wonder the ii, pulled out. Much as I respect Jason's technical knowledge and experience, to continue to enjoy my support as ceo then he needs to prove, this quarter that he can get a project, any project, over the line.
good question
there's the matter of repaying the soft loans to them first
the resource was downvalued in the last accounts to reflect the simpler but less (theoretically) productive wells
if there was an asset id like to see flogged off then its HH