Member Info for flundra

At least it looks like Malawi are keen to see progress (even if the Facebook post is a bit confused).

And more neck than a brass giraffe, having d_icked around with the MDA for so long.

Thanks esduk, interesting.

I had in mind Lancaster selling to a 3rd party investor as step one in a closed loop completion process. No transfer of MKAR shares, stands apart from PIPE financing, and I can't see how it could possibly destabilise value. Won't fly though if it falls foul of the BCA provisions, or legal/regulatory requirements relating to PIPE or otherwise.

Not long till we find out how it goes.

Funds from the PIPE financing go to MKAR, I take that at face value. But a secondary offer looks like an unnecessary complication, perhaps an AI confection. MKA should just sell some shares to the other investor! Keep it simple.

Legal and SEC etc requirements around the PIPE financing are presumably separate, and don't operate to prevent MKA selling some of its likely 40m shares in MKAR to another investor for value before or as part of the BCA completion and nasdaq listing arrangements, if MKA want to raise cash that way. Such sale could happen immediately before but as part and parcel of completion. No valuation, SEC, legal or optics objections surely? Has AI conflated some issues here?

Happily all my CM shares are going well. I hold BRES and SVML, both strong holds for me atm. I don't think anyone's mentioned HREE yet (REs Madagascar), still buying those.

Nothing beats MKA though.

I see what you're saying Drantley, fwiw it's just a bit far fetched for me, as a reason for acceleration. I don't know how many companies with such warrants announce acceleration, when they're able to. My guess is, er, 100%. Ie routine, expected by all.

I think it's just the way Cotec structured the warrants. Cotec shares go up, warrants have to be exercised early. Snooze and you lose.

It's another decent wedge going in at Cotec level for sure.

Guess but April perhaps after Easter hols maybe? GM (for vote) is shortly after the Scheme Doc is published. Scheme expected to be effective in Q2. Long stop August.

The Scheme Document, containing further information about the Acquisition and notices of the Court Meeting and the General Meeting will be published as soon as reasonably practicable, and, in any event, within 28 days of this announcement (or such later time as BidCo, Augmentum and the Panel agree).

Https://www.mining.com/rare-earth-supply-crunch-triggers-global-power-shift/

Velcro's point 3 has occurred to me a few times over the years too. It's remained a small team despite significant expansion and being on course for significantly more. Hopefully a combination of good fortune, clean living, key man insurance, good recruitment as we expand (happening already), and succession planning addresses this. Just my view, but techical knowledge of HPMS is perhaps most significant here. Is it well enough covered to survive sudden incapacity or death of any of the key personnel (eg Allan Walton)? Probably imo. Strong Hyp and HypUS Bods. RE separation and magnet supply chain knowledge is well covered and Songwe has its MDA. The corporate progress of MKAR and financing is also less of a worry imo. Not saying anyone could do these things, or as well, but there's others from within or outside who probably could step in successfully.

A good expression I've heard is building a patent thicket.

A constant well handled flow of patented improvements, ever evolving to maintain strong legally defensible IP, effectively preventing copycats.

I've always had the impression UoB and the other good guys in the mix here are well on top of this issue.

Thanks to rumpel and velcro for such informative posts on Azoty. Azoty perhaps need MKAR more than MKAR need Azoty, certainly at this early stage. Sounds like if handled well, with government support, Azoty could get a nice shot in the arm from this. Chemicals and distribution business, and a nice rental stream from a state of the art RE separation plant. Virtuous circle. Could happen quickly too from funding to build out to production with Pulawy's advantages with strategic CRMA status.

On US listing timeframes, might news be close?

It's basically 10 months to year end (the middle of Hyp US/Julian's end '26/early '27 window as per the new presentation). Not that long basically.

There's many potential pitfalls on the route to listing of course (eg CPTK was a suspended SPAC I recall, and there's been various unforeseen delays), but assuming a May (middle of Q2) listing for MKAR, that'll be 17 months from the original CPTK LOI in Jan '25. Ie it's taken quite a while.

Julian's timeframes can be optimistic.

But even so, I wonder if we might hear something on listing Hyp US sooner rather than later, if he's serious about actual listing end '26/early '27. Something lined up already I wonder?

"Potential US Listing Late 2026/Early 2027"

👍

Footer p17

It'll be interesting to see what the independent valuation of the portfolio to be included in the Scheme Document will show.

Time will tell, but I suspect it'll be little changed from the most recent NAV of 159.50, which would basically mean we'd be selling at a 30% undervalue. I believe the directors should have revealed yesterday what valuation they were working to when recommending the offer. They had to have had one. I'm unimpressed they chose not to share.

What support will the offer get amongst IIs and PIs I wonder? It's a no from me atm.

To my mind, it'll be about whether the directors' reasoning makes sense to investors in the light of this upcoming updated valuation. Ie is low liquidity, difficulty raising capital whilst listed etc reason enough to accept a potentially very significant hit.

What a disappointing position to be in. Fintech's an exciting sector with massive potential. Good investee companies here imo, whatever view people have of the BoD. Just no real interest from the market in AUGM whilst publicly listed.

As a shareholder, one of the reasons you live with discounts to NAV (very steep in AUGM's case) is that you "know" true value will be realised on merger or t/o. On the face of it therefore, AUGM's being sold at a 30% undervalue (reference September's NAV).

Assuming there's been no material change in that figure (and it's unlikely to have changed much), the directors need to explain this 111p figure in more detail.

Have we been stitched up?

I'll vote against too as things stand.

Again reading off the HL website, NAV is produced semi annually. The last one was 30/9/25. So another is due end March. Are we going to get that? Then or earlier?

Today's announcement doesn't reference NAV as far as I can see. Shareholders will need this to properly consider the offer. We need an update of the September '25 159.50 NAV figure.

Think I'll hang around for a while in case a sensible offer's forthcoming.

And LSE sort out your red dot RNS notification delays. V poor recently.

I get the directors' reasoning for recommendation, except for, er, the price of 111pps. Far too low surely.

HL has estimated NAV at 159.50. Latest actual NAV (Sept '25) same 159.50. Discount of 44.95%.

V disappointed having been in this share for years. Market not interested for whatever reason.

The very fact Japan are seriously thinking about seabed mining (at 5,700m no less !!) emphasises the RE supply chain restructuring imperative.

A Hyp Japan JV can't be far away surely.

I'd say forget the seabed, focus on keeping your e-waste and recycle. And I also know a hill on dry land in a warm hearted country, ready and waiting to be simply dismantled, containing more REs than you can shake a stick at.