Member Info for fatherelmer

Does anyone have any idea in regards what an appropriate P/E Ratio should be for TSTR these days please? I did an on-line sector search (Mining & Metals) and came up with a range between 5 and 96 with an average of 36 but not sure what to believe!! Reason for the request i9s to try and 'model' what the SP may be (based upon P/E) once production starts.....under conservatism principles I'm inclined to use something like 3-5. The follow up question would then be do you use the full potential profit share from SPMP as the driver or just the likely dividend stream due to TSTR from SPMP?

pbody, I don't know / can't comment re layout changes. as for your comment about TSTR running the show - I don't think that's the case (anymore) and for this phase of work it'll be down to the lead contractor (Worley Parsons) and thereafter the 300+ staff that have been hired.

Forestfred, the interesting thing for me about this is that (IMHO) there must be some form of underlying demand for this specific product as otherwise why launch it as a brand?? I therefore wonder how big the demand is and look forward to hearing about specific collaborations (soon?) featuring Hexotene.

The Trade Mark is now in process of being registered (since 14th March) and all being well should be complete by about the end of May when it should be officially announced. https://trademarks.ipo.gov.uk/ipo-tmcase/page/Results/1/UK00003296807 Interesting thing is that it looks like Hexotene is a mix of both Graphene and Boron rather than Boron Nitride.

Wassatt, unfortunately our friend from beyond makes the same mistake that most do and that is to assume that BOTH SPMP and TSTR pay out 100% of their profits / dividends received to shareholders. For SPMP I don't think this will be the case in the early years as they have some very expensive loans (15% pa?) to repay and in later years may choose to invest in either increasing capacity at Sohar or additional facilities elsewhere. As for TSTR they have certain 'overheads' to pay and may possibly revive interest in mining - personally some of the money raised to date should've been used to start mining and at least generate enough income to cover their costs (if not also contribute to SPMP build costs) but that ship has long sailed. As for how would Odey exit if they took it private? Well as dividends are a few years off, and it's been a relatively cheap investment for them (ca �16m to date) I can see them just letting SPMP grow and establish itself as a cash generating entity and then after a few years look to sell off their share either via an IPO or perhaps just to the holders of the other 60%. As for TSTR if it were to go private I can see Odey selling off all the assets and shutting it down as it's all really just a pointless expense on top of the 40% SPMP holding, this would allow them to pay back some of their investment, cut costs and retain all 40% of any SPMP dividends.

Wassatt, isn't there also interest (at 25% pa) and a range of other fees to also pay? As I've said before exactly how much is outstanding - and required to be paid back by 30th June 2018 - is unclear to me, but what ever the amount is, it's a lot, and given that TSTR have no income, and little cash of their own, and may / may not receive the outstanding $2m due from SPMP on commissioing in time, how this outstanding debt is to be repaid is very much 'the elephant in the room' at present. To me there are 4 options... 1. debt for equity swap as has been done before (end result defacto being taken private) 2. more share issuance with heavy dilution, another OO if you will (given Odey currently holding ca. 65% I suspect this would also end up with being taken private as in 1 above) 3 . TSTR raising funds through borrowing secured against future SPMP dividends 4 . TSTR raising funds by selling off mining assets From these options my money is on '1' as I don't see any point in '2', don't think anyone would lend in '3' as the dividends are too far into the future and the level of payment is unknown, and for '4' would they raise enough given that any buyers would know TSTR is in effect having a 'fire sale'. The question therefore becomes what is the conversion price and what is the level of cash offer made to the minority holders (ie us poor suffering PIs)?? As I hope Odey would want to treat Karen O'Mahoney fairly any conversion rate / cash offer would need to be above her break even rate (0.0448p) with possibly even a little premium. The only thing that might aid the minority holders is if there are 'rules' (as had been speculated upon previously) that 'require' the price paid to be higher. The cynic in me also says that it wouldn't surprise me if completion of commissioning, and therefore payment of the $2m owed for this event, doesn't occur until after 30th June 2018. Whatever, we shall find out soon enough, as for us minority holders, I think the end game is very much here and that we won't be involved come any future dividends in 2021 /2022 and beyond.

saltyjim, the Vittoria tyres that you mention contain Graphene from Direct+ (DCTA) they've been trumpeting this for a while. Do the UCI have strict rules (like in most elite, and especially high performance like F! for example) that say what you can / can't do or use and include things like lateral strength tests of weight minima, etc??

Max, you could well be right about Sky and them having an accelerated timetable (aiming for Giro in May or TdF in July) though I suspect that nothing really before next year as remember Sky don't actually manufacture anything and so would have to persuade numerous 3rd parties to also work with VRS. As for the more recent collaborations being 'lower' I don't mean to denigrate - as I think they are all good and as NR says himself sometimes a smaller entity can be much less risk averse and more nimble than a larger one - what I mean is that they are of a smaller potential sales value (in of themselves) than say a Fortune 100 company or a Global Consumer Goods Co, and so likely to move the SP less. Good point about the Chairman also possibly being required for the signing of any Chinese deal - not something I see happening before 28th March.

Wolf, this share has become very news driven in the last 6 months - mainly because there was a good, high quality, stream of it culminating in the China LoI - since then whilst news flow has continued it has been at a 'lower' level, with everything else being over shadowed by China in any event. This has then spoilt folks and the lack of any news in regards China - with the expectations of the China trip with the PM being wildly unrealistic - being the main thing now holding the SP back / down, to such an extent that even if yesterday's RNS had mentioned an order value I don't think the SP would've moved much. Touching upon China again, with the upcoming investor event, and NR stating that the CFO is currently in China, I suspect that expectations of news on this front are again being built up unrealistically, with the SP 'waiting' - IMHO Neill would be present in China at any contract signing (think of the Asian culture around 'face' and respect) - and that this most recent visit is rather just another part of the process from which the CFO has to return, report back and then next steps be planned, and that to finalise such a contract may take a few more such visits.

Krispy, IMHO I don't think it'll actually get that far - the crunch is coming far sooner (sometime in the next 3 months) - with the repayment of the latest loan (and any other outstanding amounts remaining unpaid from the previous one) this means that at least $3m will be required before 30th June 2018, though it could easily be double that amount as whether or not the original $6m loan has been fully paid off is unclear (to me). In any event this is not (and I'm not sure it ever was) an Income share.

....I wonder what he has to say???? https://twitter.com/Zi_DIG/status/974254630459838464

https://audioboom.com/posts/6725285-asiamet-resources-ars-versarien-vrs-symphony-environmental-sym-chris-bailey-on-ulvr-oml-pzc

Fred, unfortunately I missed out on a slot for the 28th, but hope those that do go will feedback to the rest of us.

Forestfred, not wishing to fuel your excitement further but I forgot two of the collaborations: - 3d printing (Absolute engineering) - batteries (Warwick Manufacturing Group) So the full list (hopefully I've not missed anyone out this time) should be as follows: - aerospace & defence (IAI, CT Engineering) - chemicals (US Fortune 100, Scafell Organics) - consumer goods (Global Co, Vivobarefoot, Global Sports Apparel Manufacturer, Richard Mille) - elite sport (Team Sky, Bromley Technologies) - medical (Dental, Dementia, Bandages) - 3d printing (Absolute Engineering) - batteries (Warwick Manufacturing Group)

In fact one of the best factors in play with VRS is the spread of their collaborations / involvement as this derisks the opportunity on the one hand (by not being reliant upon a single partner / sector) whilst significantly up scaling the risk on the other (by spreading themselves so thinly can they execute effectively?). - aerospace & defence (IAI, CT Engineering) - chemicals (US Fortune 100, Scafell Organics) - consumer goods (Global Co, Vivobarefoot, Global Sports Apparel Manufacturer, Richard Mille) - elite sport (Team Sky, Bromley Technologies) - medical (Dental, Dementia, Bandages) They also have 3 products to spread the risk: - Nanene - Graphinks - Hexotene And their overall business strategy of having 'traditional' businesses to support the new technologies helps too: - Total Carbide (Oil & Gas, Aerospace) - ACC Cyroma (Automotive, FMCG, Aerospace) - Versarien Technologies (Extruded Aluminium Heatsinks, Copper Foam) With a range of routes to market: - Sigma Aldrich (for Inks) - Huntsman (for Nanene) - Mouser (for Copper Foam) - Direct from VRS Companies

Forestfred, I agree things are looking better (especially for VRS) and a 'head of steam' may actually be building so that the reality we all hope for comes to pass, and does so in the very near future, but until the collaborations (or China in fairness as that will just skip the collaborations part) actually come to pass, we should all practice some caution (though there is nothing wrong with excitement and enthusiasm too :-)).

Cra19, you may well be correct and this RNS is just confirming something that has been on-going for a while, however on the other hand it could easily be the case that this won't have an impact upon Team Sky (and their kit) before the 2019 season, IMHO this is the more likely scenario.

From this weeks show.... http://nanotechweb.org/cws/article/tech/71261

forestfred, these kind of collaborations are great, and always good to see, however you have hit the proverbial nail on the head in your final sentence......We Just need 1 Major deal out of all this interest !!..... Until then we are only a little bit closer to someone finally being able to claim that they have truly commercialised Graphene, something that's been 'coming' (and often claimed) since 2004!

Krispy, you missed my point about timings and the co-terminus nature of year ends for both TSTR and SPMP (both 31st December) yes SPMP could pay TSTR a Dividend in 2021, however I then think it (very) unlikely, given the finances of TSTR, that they will pay (us) a Dividend before the end of the financial year in which they receive the income and so not until after FY 2021 has finished. I also expect that TSTR will retain the vast majority of any Dividend received as this is their only source of income - so any resulting Dividend to us will probably be no more than 10-20% of the total Dividend they receive from SPMP.