Member Info for flundra

Obs, as you've invited questions! I'm an LTH, a bit out of the loop, but have I got this about right?

The CC approval as I understand it is the Indian banks having (at long last) internally approved the account/recoveries managers’ negotiated in principle settlement agreement, and as such it is something you’d ordinarily expect to get approved (like with the Italians). Catastrophic if not approved of course, but they’ve now basically really only said the settlement agreement doesn’t fall foul of the banks criteria for settlement, ie the account/recoveries managers haven’t got anything technically wrong, and can proceed. So we can be happy, but the real bounce should come when the agreement finally completes, today tomorrow next week next month next year, depending on where we are with that. The hope is that, like Kiran says, it’s at an advanced stage. Hopefully there are no sticking points. But it’s still wait and see. The Court bit is to all intents and purposes a rubber stamp, but it’s not quite at rubber stamp stage with the parties yet, is my understanding.

Let's see completion now and get the 200% type SP rises. No more delays please.

Anderson and the new gang could be ORM's saviours, or the kiss of death, or somewhere in between. We've got to wait for now imo, but my gut feeling is we'll get news shortly. I can't believe there isn't a fairly advanced and perhaps specific plan behind his recent manoeuvres to get control (buying shares, nominating directors etc.) He's spent a lot of time and money on this.
I'd say give them a chance, although the longer we go without good news, the more suspicion about their motives grows.

Time for the BoD to buy some shares, unless we're in a closed period with a deal already in the offing? I'd also like to see the emphasis on performance based remuneration for them, not just large management fees. And maybe some options at 2 or 3p perhaps? We need an incentivised BoD.

Directors have the power to allot relevant/equity securities now (res 5 + 6), giving flexibility to complete transactions. I recall Anderson's previous refusal to vote for this scuppered the ROC copper deal.
Hope Anderson's got something decent lined up now. He owes us one.
It would have been nice to be a year into a copper project now, with electrification becoming increasingly important.

Sorry, I hijacked your thread there SuperM.
My thought was just that because Dunraven isn't a mining project, it may not be the plan. Anderson's letter was general too. I guess we have to wait for more news now.

The Board intends to continue with the Company's existing strategy being to acquire, explore and develop MINING projects

https://moneyweek.com/investments/commodities/energy/603879/uranium-price-is-soaring-best-way-to-invest

Timely reiteration by WHO that 7m pa die prematurely of air pollution, mainly from fossil fuels. 7 million pa! WHO have been putting this stat out for years, and it's astonishing how little weight is given to it. That's perhaps because it's poorer countries that suffer most and these deaths are less visible (generally slow and not dramatic) so get less attention. And also because the only conclusion is we have to increase nuclear capacity, the viable solution we've got and rely on. Generally that's still politically sensitive and seen by some as controversial unfortunately. I think the continued failure to adopt more widely the ready solution that would prevent the 7m needless deaths pa (and CC and environmental damage) is what's controversial.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58657224

Sat Times leader was interesting on this. Urging political leaders to embrace nuclear to make net zero targets a bit more achievable (obviously). It also sl.agged off Spain for being so dumb and also its counterproductive tax grab on energy companies.
This mine needs permitting now. Come on.

Thanks GVH. This is the Meat Atlas report itself. The sections on p60 and p64 relate. Not "news" as such, but it's the debate.

https://friendsoftheearth.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/MeatAtlas2021_final_web.pdf

Jim on ANIC around 32mins mark. Looking good.

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

It's a dreadful government for sure.

I'm hopeful the general narrative around nuclear power (seen by some as controversial) is changing for the better though. Actually what's controversial is accepting millions dying every year from hydrocarbons (and the planet with them), and failing to embrace more fully the viable green solution (nuclear) we already rely on. Spain needs to reduce for example Algerian and Moroccan gas imports and increase its own nuclear capacity. That includes permitting this mine.

The 2016 DFS and previous guidance from BKY suggested a timeframe of about 18 months/2 yrs from permitting to first production. How nice it would have been to be producing now with U prices predictably rising (spot is now over $44/lb).

There’ll be no net zero without nuclear, and the permits to get the mine into construction need to be granted now, to help achieve that important goal and the socio-economic benefits the mine brings.

I wonder what the advisers will recommend as the optimum time to IPO. Go for it now, or wait for products and sales revenue streams, eg. I suspect a BlueNalu IPO would do very well whenever it’s done, given the high profile of issues like ocean and seafood health, sustainability etc. I also suspect BlueNalu’s market value after its own well-handled high profile IPO will significantly exceed any value extrapolated from ANIC (all other things being equal), so we may be pleasantly surprised. BlueNalu may raise $$$ on IPO and bring in big IIs too, so it might be a very different animal anyway. Time will tell.

Incidentally, BYND shares were initially priced at $25 but ended their first trading day at over $65….

I wonder how near/far we are from BlueNalu IPOing. That should be a very nice pay day for ANIC when it comes.
The Nomad (Birds Eye, Findus) collaboration looks very astute, and adds a nice European dimension to America and Asia.
And it's not every day you hear Feltham and San Diego mentioned in the same breath....

Love the Venn diagram lol!

Excellent research and links Dave.

Sad that countries like the UK still inevitably rush back to gas and coal when the wind doesn't blow, instead of increasing nuke capability. Earlier this week...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58469238

"The Nuclear Industry Association said the decision to fire up another coal power plant highlighted the urgent need to invest in new nuclear plants.

"Otherwise, we will continue to burn coal as a fall-back and fall well short of our net zero ambitions," said the trade body's chief executive, Tom Greatrex."

Doubly sad if nuclear isn't given a fair hearing at cop26. It's essential. Unbelievable that countries like Germany are closing down nuclear for political reasons, and still relying on coal and gas, indeed increasingly more Russian gas.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/focus/climate-change-and-nuclear-energy/letter-sent-to-the-cop26-president.aspx

Bit Hobson’s choice. A stand off between a hamstrung bod and Anderson’s agenda, we shareholders stuck in the middle with cash eroding fast.

It does seem likely that Anderson has a plan ie to reverse Dunraven into ORM (the proposed O’Donnell and McMorrow appointments), so that’s perhaps no mystery, despite Henry’s comment.

If Anderson is successful with his nominee directors and effectively takes control, it could be good or bad. At least there’s a project to pursue, and if the plan’s a good one, could be happy days. With a big personal shareholding, he might not want to dilute too much in any fund raise either.

If Anderson is unsuccessful, might he then start buying shares again with a view to t/o? Get control that way. That might boost the sp, depending on timing.

As to what if anything to actively vote for at the AGM, there’s not much to get enthusiastic about imo.

Might a third party also come along, bid handsomely and put us all out our misery? The listing, some cash and assets, and retained losses to set against future profits is attractive.

If I was BKY, I’d start legal proceedings asap. It’s been long enough, the coalition and its puppet CSN appointees are basically deliberately thwarting due process to try to realise their daft political anti-nuclear ideology, and BKY’s recent “collaborative” approach (specifically the provision of additional info over and above their obligations) has been wrongly and cynically used against them by CSN to produce the unfavourable report. Time to get confrontational imo.

You couldn’t get more bullish heavyweight legal advice (Freehills) that the report is legally unsound. I’m sure they’re right. There’s no credible legal opinion backing the CSN report as far as I’m aware.

What would the legal proceedings be? I guess something akin to judicial review of the report - CSN II. If successfully reviewed, CSN would presumably have to do the report again, properly this time. The government would still then need to permit the mine. All this means expense and delay, and some uncertainty despite BKY’s confidence in its position.

As others have also noted, there is the prospect of a change of government in 2023, but BKY shouldn’t delay issuing proceedings imo, which can be paused/withdrawn, if a supportive re-vamped CSN and government takes over. The current regime is both dishonest and immature, and I doubt there’s any prospect of progress without forcing the issue with legal proceedings, and no possibility of negotiation for compensation either, if the project is not to proceed.