Member Info for Florence141414

Yes I believe that’s correct. My understanding is that Ascendant will fund MAFLs share of the development costs on the agreement that it will be paid back from MAFLs portion of the initial cash flows.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogOtKBPYVew

I think that is more of a maximum term as Ascendant go on to state that they expect the phase 1 feasibility study to be ready in 2022 and that phase 2 (the nine year thing) can theoretically happen simultaneously as well i.e. it is not pre-determined to happen after a fixed term of nine years.

I think two huge question marks have been answered in the last week or so.

Are Ascendant capable of raising the money to fulfil their earn-in/development obligations? YES!

Do we have a co-operative government? YES!

The risk at this market cap was already low and continues to get lower.

‘The Tender Offer would have a basic entitlement (subject to possible reduction to ensure the Tender Offer does not exceed 40,096,476 Ordinary Shares) per Qualifying Shareholder of 500,000 Ordinary Shares. The basic entitlement is intended to ensure that Shareholders with interests in Ordinary Shares equal to or smaller than this basic entitlement are able to tender their interests for cash in full should they so choose.’

This entire paragraph is stating that anyone that has up to 500,000 shares or £210k will get fully filled in the tender at 42p if they so wish, is that correct?

So, assuming your holding is below that threshold, anyone that wants to sell 100% in the tender can sell 100% in the tender. I think.

Oldholder,

Would that not mean that either:

These funds are in cahoots with JKX on this and as such won’t be competing with us in the tender offer.

Or,

They will vote against the resolution and JKX won’t get anywhere near the 75% they need to pass this anyway?

21.9% free float, 23.3% being bought back

I think that means that anyone who wants 42p a share can get 42p a share, right?

Brel,

Congratulations on your 1000th post! And one quite befitting of the milestone at that. Couldn't agree more.

that should be cash at December 31 not March 31

Hi Silver,

That's correct except that you have left out the $1m received in June of this year. I probably also should have mentioned that I was including the Cerrado, Ascendant and other shareholdings\etfs that currently total about £1.8m in my £5m figure so there is a small 'all things being equal' assumption in there.

So cash at March 31 of £578k + $1m in June this year + $1m June next year + $2.5m Dec next year + £1.8m shareholding\etfs - £450k running costs over that period = £5m or thereabouts.

Totally agree regarding Ideon, I think it was in proactive investors interview in June that JV mentioned they already have a $35m orderbook. If that really is the revolutionary technology we're all hoping, who knows what our 2% stake could be worth!?

https://www.ascendantresources.com/English/Investors/press-releases/press-release-details/2021/Ascendant-Resources-Closes-C3.16-Million-Non-Brokered-Private-Placement/default.aspx

Capital raised and a 50% over subscription to boot.

I've bought some more here this morning. Ascendant have proved their ability to raise capital and have also proved their commitment to completing the earn in agreement. That means that in just over a year's time, barring something extraordinary, MAFL will have cash and equivalents of £5m or thereabouts.

Right now the market is offering you the chance to buy £5m in a year's time for £4m today. On top of that you're getting three or four investments that if any one of them were to work out would double that figure and of course the big one that we're all hoping for that would likely 10x that number. The risk reward here is skewed so heavily in our favour as investors.

I'd be genuinely interested to hear from anyone that disagrees. I don't actually think I've seen anything negative on here yet that specifically refers to the value proposition only the illiquidity and lack of movement of the share price.

GLA

Only just spotted the 10% rise on Friday. Did some rough calculations and they are currently worth approx £240k more than they would have been carried at in the last reported NAV of March 31

Yes, I’d be happy to do so.

Redcorp owns 85% the Lagoa Salgada Project, the government owns the other 15%. After the completion of the earn in agreement Ascendant will own 80% of Redcorp. This means that Ascendant and MAFL will be 80/20 in Redcorp which itself will be 85/15 with the government in the Lagoa Salgada project. MAFL will own 20% of Redcorp which is equal to 17% of the Lagoa Salgada project (20% of 85%).

At this stage the Lagoa Salgada project would be 68/17/15 between Ascendant l/MAFL/Government.

If the government do relinquish their stake to Redcorp then Redcorp and the LS project are one and the same and as such 80/20 in Redcorp is equal to 80/20 in the project. If they don’t then the 68/17/15 ownership structure will remain.

The government have a free carry to the feasibility study so there is no reason for them to relinquish their stake before then.

It’s 17% or 20%.

Shaz,

If you read the wording of the latest PEA RNS carefully it is quite clear. Ascendant are earning into 80% Redcorp NOT the project, therefore MAFL will retain a 20% ownership of LS or 17% if the government maintain their holding.

The key point being that there is no scenario in which MAFLs holding is only 5%.

https://www.ascendantresources.com/English/Investors/press-releases/press-release-details/2021/Ascendant-Resources-Announces-Non-Brokered-Private-Placement/default.aspx

Ascendant raising more money to send our way

Awesome thank you

Hi Nom,

I think some confusion had been caused by MAFL referring to the project and redcorp interchangeably in some of the RNS’s. You could tell that they made an effort to clear this up in the recent PEA announcement.

The free carry to feasibility is also interesting as it suggests that the government have no reason to give up their 15% until post feasibility, at which point they will be asked to stump up cash which they may be unwilling to do. But no reason to cross that bridge until they come to it. As I say though, it makes a difference of 3% maximum to us so it’s not very important. If Lagoa Salgada ever happens or even looks like happening, those of us that have bought in at these prices will multibag whether MAFL are carrying 20% or 17%.

Whoops, 5m of cash and listed securities by December 22 not 4.8m

From piecing together various bits of information my best guess is that as of right now listed shareholdings (including cerrado and ascendant) and etfs are about £2m with cash of £0.8m. Seeing as Ascendant show no signs of slowing down I'm very confident that we will be able to add the remaining earn ins of £2.6m to that cash figure by December 22, albeit minus about £0.4m running costs between now and then.

So we have 4.8m of cash and publicly listed securities as of 15 months time subject to Ascendant remaining solvent and zero/equal movement in shareholdings.

Add to that whatever valuation the market deems fit to give the unlisted assets at that point being Golden Sun, Ideon Technologies and Cap Energy.

Then we have either a 20% or 17% share of a mine that has just had a PEA that stated an NPV of $246 million.

I know some people believe that the retained % of Lagoa Salgada is only 5% but I'm almost certain this is not the case as Ascendant's earn in agreement pertains to ownership of redcorp and not 'the project'. MAFL have mentioned that they are trying to negotiate with the Portuguese government for redcorp to take ownership of the governments 15% stake in 'the project', this either will or will not happen.

If it does then redcorp which will be owned 80/20 Ascendant/MAFL will own 100% of 'the project',simple.

If not then redcorp will own 85% of 'the project' with the government retaining the other 15%, as MAFL will own 20% of redcorp that would mean that they will own 20% of 85% and Ascendant will own 80% of 85%. The resulting situation would be a 68%/17%/15% split between Ascendant/MAFL/The Government.

If anybody thinks I've missed any glaring risk factors then I'm all ears but as far as I can make out we are sitting on major upside that admittedly may or may not materialize but with the luxury of extremely limited downside risk.

It was funny to see that their netback computations only accounted for a price up to $10 per mcf and we’re now at $18! If you carry on adding the 0.36 cents netback per extra $1 price increase, at $18 we should be generating $7 netback per mcf. I think H1 has production was 9,200 mcf/d.