Member Info for flundra

There's an interesting graphic in the online version (but not in the paper version) about a forecast rapid rise in cultivated meat. The source looks heavyweight (UN/World Bank?) but the graphic's not referred to in the text oddly.
Also the article doesn't say what the author thought of the "composed" version.

No one seems to have mentioned the N word at cop 26 yet, the actual solution to these emissions.
There's a few days left to do so.

Catching up. This looks OK to me indeed advantageous to ANIC. My concern would be if the better opportunities went to private equity via New Agrarian leaving ANIC with the crumbs. But conflicts are dealt with by ANIC directors and that in conjunction with the existing Shellbay agreement and a new ANIC NED appointment should ensure ANIC aren't prejudiced or sidelined.

Today would be a good day to put a rocket up the BoD (with the blue touch paper lit). We need to hear from them.

Enjoying this :)

Exactly P1D. There won’t be anywhere near enough from renewables, so atm it’ll be fossil fuels and imports (and inevitably a low profile extension of their current nuclear power programme). Not even this govt would let the lights go out, or push a policy of degrowth.

Thinking about your nationalisation point, this lot probably are capable of anything, but even so I can’t believe they’re trying to nationalise Retortillo by the back door. It would be gross fraud if CSN2 or permitting is being deliberately withheld/misused with the objective of causing BKY to fail, and the asset to revert to the state in consequence, for potential exploitation later under a future policy change. I think they just want Spanish uranium to stay in the ground forever, and hope domestically (in vain of course) that renewables expand sufficiently in time, so all direct and indirect nuclear activity can cease, with the law and BKY being expendable.

Who adjudicates? Hopefully the judiciary ultimately if it comes to it. The CSN and coalition are acting above the law (and not for the first time). Let’s hope Spain has some sensible people too, who’ve heard of Locke, Montesquieu and the separation of powers for example. Rational behaviour and common sense tends to leave the room whenever nuclear is mentioned, but the law doesn’t, nor should it.

It’s an interesting thought, but I doubt the current anti-nuclear policy is a conspiracy for nationalisation with a view to using the asset btw. Some of them genuinely seem to believe now’s the time to abandon nuclear forever.

It’s disappointing that OIA are withdrawing, and the partnership has become conflict. Maybe they’ve tried unsuccessfully to re-negotiate the investment agreement with BKY, and to avoid the loan note converting are now trying to escape using every conceivable potential legal angle in proceedings, from misrep, through breach of contract and warranty, to repudiation and frustration. I guess it’ll become apparent whether they have a real case, or whether this is more desperation and/or tactics. Atm it’s hard to see how OIA, CSN or the government’s positions are tenable.

OIA's timing is presumably because of this (which perhaps makes its action a bit suspect?):

On the 30 November 2021, The OIA Convertible Note which will automatically convert resulting in the increase in share capital of the same amount increasing net assets to $73,785,000 (based on the 30 June 2021 financial position)

It will presumably turn on the interpretation of (particularly) the termination provisions of the investment agreement and the law around repudiation and frustration. How closely and precisely did the investment agreement address the current situation?

Not good.

Hard to see what such a material adverse change might be? Nothing's been RNS'd or reported.

Is the suggestion there's been a misrep or breach of warranty or covenant by BKY? Unlikely? We're told that's the only way OIA can terminate. I can understand OIA wanting to pull out by negotiation with BKY because of the delay and CSN/govt approach. BKY's price for this might be legal (action against CSN/govt) costs and re-financing (if achievable?) costs, plus a reasonable compensation sum?

It wouldn't surprise me if OIA were throwing the towel in. It was the first thought I had when their nominee director resigned last week. Time for BKY to pursue legal remedy against the Spanish government and CSN now imo.

My understanding is that the directors are paid nothing in fees other than the high-watermarked 15% of NAV increases, ie 100% performance based. Yes it's eye-watering but for this kind of pioneering high risk investment I'd rather see the emphasis on performance than management fees, and there aren't really any other companies to compare against to determine how reasonable or unreasonable that fee structure is. The recent funding cost was effectively 15%, zero upfront but 15% (varying with NAV) through the above NAV fee formula.

I guess there's still time for Spain to get back on the right track, and a change of government could help that.

https://thebreakthrough.org/issues/energy/on-anti-nuclear-bull****

This article explores the difficulties posed by the falsehoods of anti-nuke ideology, like which prevail in the current Spanish regime.

The same author points out that Germany is "set for the biggest jump in greenhouse emissions in 30 years". Inevitable following their nuclear closure programme, increased coal burning, and soon-to-be-switched-on Nord Stream 2. Spain will follow with its own emissions increase too, without a change of course.

I think we are entitled to hear something substantial about the plans for ORM and any new projects very soon, so come on BoD! Let’s be having you, and a decent RNS and SP rise. I also think the honeymoon period for this new BoD should be short. Copper prices are shooting up, and it was Anderson’s refusal to approve issuing equity that prevented the ROC copper deal, put together by the previous BoD, from proceeding. That project and the ORM SP should have been flying by now, so Anderson and the new BoD owe us shareholders a good plan B in short order. There’s a huge question mark over Timmons particularly imo, an Anderson nominee and now the only surviving BoD member from before. WTF was he doing sitting on the previous BoD pursuing ROC, whilst effectively knowing it was doomed all along!

It would be very nice if they could all get on with it now and complete. Hopefully the outstanding KYC/AML stuff is quick and routine, and otherwise the talk is bullish and about "finalisation" of documentation, so it does look well progressed and..er..imminent. Needs to get over the line though in the next few weeks. Perhaps by 5 Nov so we've got another reason to set the fireworks off?! imo. glalth.

Ideology's winning here. For the time being at least.

I guess BKY are giving CSN the opportunity to respond and re-do csn 2 report. Mañana if we're lucky.
Then there's cop26. How will attitudes to nuclear emerge from that. Might influence things.
I can't see the CSN or the coalition changing tack though unless forced, so BKY might have to bite the bullet and start legal proceedings. It'll be David and Goliath, and won't be pretty, cheap or quick.

Thanks obs
Yes, I too would like to think the time has been spent getting it done and dealing with any sticking points. Dream scenario completion today, and a few hundred % SP rise tomorrow!
PS I've very much appreciated your posts