Member Info for faramog

be a bit unusual if not, CLN's usually have two choices to pay off and the choice rests with the company (not us)... but I would be delighted if we had the choice to pay cash

Introv, to be clear, paying the CLN's in cash is in our best interests IMO as we both have the cash and are generating lots of it. Issuing the shares is not in our interests as it dilutes us for no gain

Unfortunately, the choice is entirely out of our hands

I don't agree with thjis "So any transaction that does not involve us paying Duferco the $5.75M (plus interest so ~6M) must be deemed by the company to be in our best interest."

Not paying cash means converting to shares. That means Bushy issuing more and diluting the rest of us for no real gain. We have plenty of cash in hand and if at all possible should pay off the CLN's with cash - but that choice is not ours to make

I don't get why when oodles of cash was starting to be made CLN's were entered into, they are a 2-way bet: the issuing company takes a bet on future growth or the ability to repay, the company (us) takes a bet we would grow significantly so shares to be issued are diluted considerably.

I think Bassguy is right and the nefarious thieves (sorry those taking 'dues') had to be bought off.

Big business loves deals, because deals mean large fees and kickbacks - we have not really had to do this in a negative way for a long time but I along with many am getting a tad miffed at the repeated lack of real concern over the SP performance. It is all very well making $50M+ in profit, but if that does not translate to an investor return ....

well put Bassguy ... their managing of the market, investors and message is extremely light touch

we can but hope there is a plan .. or we will get a bit of dilution ! There is clearly no incentive at current pricing for the CLN's to be settled with cash

As BE kicks off there will be no need to sell to china ... Why loose 13%

I was wondering if LSE had blocked everyone for a bit Knuttie ....

a recording will be posted onto the company website the RNS says (I am guessing a day or two at least)

I know @Bassguy ... it is crackers

Well I disagree Libero... FM did not speak about the range but gave the top figure in two separate interviewers. He did not caveate it with any CV19 data but was quite bullish.

I remember 2/3 weeks ago there were posts alluding to a bit of inside knowledge on the Q2 data and were extremely positive.

Don't anyone get me wrong - my beef is not the data, but rather the inconsistent managing of the message ... again !

Whilst there is much to be positive about and some detailed breakdowns and cost information, CV19 has clearly had a substantial impact, in his latest round of interviews FM did not stress the production guidance range of 3960-4300, but rather emphasised being on track for 4300 (or at least gave that strong impression).

Yet 3-4 weeks later we have an 8% drop. FM must have had the preliminary data and must have known pretty much the picture. To suggest 4300 on two different recordings was disinformation he must have known to be incorrect

Clearly market inside info considerations aside, he could have phrased differently perhaps emphasising the target range and going on to talk about review in light of CV19.

Sorry to say this and I expect there will be abuse, but again, poor, inconsistent managing the message and PR

really Bassguy ... not sure I agree.

Orders in Jan then there is all the prep, groundworks etc. Rollout will take 9 months at least and BE will be in production by the end of Q1 (at least that was the last promise I remember).

I don't see any reason BE Electrolyte wont be produced, but did Bushveld already confirm if not they will use their Vanadium at another plant initially

"Sales of 879 mtV includes sales to customers of 598 mtV and intercompany sales of 281 mtV. "

Intercompany ? .... am I jumping to conclusions and thinking 'stockpiling' in BE ?

yes that is pretty clumsy ... PR & Comms has always been an issue but if aspirationally a world energy company then it needs to be a whole lot better.

No reason Bushveld cannot be part of the sunrise PR & Marketting for SA & African energy

a sort of up to date Village People gambit !

Since the II's don't see the value or potential currently and do (IMO) consider us a one product miner, then I refer back to comments over the past weeks/months that we need to rebrand as an Energy/Renewable Storage Provider.

Until BE has big orders, Until the Electrolyte plant is up and running or until dividends are paid (if not), not that many will take much notice.

Hence the treading water while the spring tightens.

FM was clear in his last crux interview that Lemur would go but that value must be obtained for the shareholder investment … quite correct !

Ultimately I think we are on the same page, but I think rather too much credence is given to the current pin-stripped bolly swillers

What green credentials..... We are a mineral miner and refiner.

What energy use mitigation is done ? Let's not confuse the energy storage market and wider contribution to renewables development off it

Yes Noviceinvestor.... Also a garage full of car batteries would work I expect.

Jog on

I thought you just got Tulips from Hampster jam

I bet they don't realise Monday is a public holiday here....