Member Info for Freedom4Uall

Thanks Troajan

The delisting rns from the 25/5/22 stated they intended to admit the shares to an alternative trading platform did this ever occur?

How would the PGM's be affected by a China, Taiwan, US conflict , the majorityof pgm demand is from the automotive sector, Taiwan produces the chips necessary for automotive production , China is a major producer of automotives, this conflict would cause automotive production to fall significantly, maybe 75% globally which would impact PGM prices significantly. What is your opinion and do you know of any articles that have covered the above ?

Net assets have doubled over the last 2 years, production is up and increasing, profitability and cash flow is outstanding, strong net cash, great company, significantly undervalued, this will rise significantly.

I believe 360p would be fair value, with a pe of 10 and a market cap of 600 million.

In a previous rns they stated they sold 3400 s19j bitmain for 6m gbp = 1764 per s19j bitmain, they now sell 3840 s19j for 4.8m gbp = 1250 per s19j. How much are these s19j bitmain retailing for ,did they not buy 20k s19j bitmain for 63.4m gbp= 3170 per s19j , are they fire selling these to their best friends . They stated if the 27m raise did not go through they would review other financing options of which a number are available with board confident even if 27m falls through other options would provide working capital for the next 12 months.

How long until 60p, what is a fair mcap considering the current situation and that the companys operations are based in a war zone, what is there daily loss due to suspended operations any estimates, i dont recommend selling Ferrexpo at this price as i do think it is a good company. But i would like the sp to be lower to reflect the true situation so one could acquire more if one chooses.

Pre News?

No production at the moment,but did they not mention that they would be selling down there Inventory of stock piled iron, so we are not in the situation of no revenue as some have stated. Can anyone estimate what the daily cost of non operating would be or the drain on cash/ net cash position?

Operations are suspended for an unknown amount of time, net cash around 100m, any estimates of what the daily cost of operation suspension will be, thus a drain on the net cash position.

Does anyone find it questionable that a company with thousands of top level btc mining machines operating in facility's in locations where energy is cheaper is operating at a massive loss and facing bankruptcy,very questionable considering if i spent 20 k on btc mining equipment i could mine it profitability.

H1 end June net debt stood at 993m, Synthomer falsely reported 2.3 x Ebitda to net debt ratio, analyst's now expect net debt to be up by around 30m to 1.02b = Ebitda to net debt 3.5x ,what measure did they use to get such a low Ebitda to net debt ratio at the H1 as even if you get H1 Ebitda of 173m x 2 = 346m , 993 ÷ 346m = 2.86 Ebitda to net debt which was a more accurate Ebitda to net debt ratio at H1.

The recent loss making report's i concluded were only as a result of the Right down on the value of btc held and not as a result of profitless operations, am i correct? Is Argo profitability mining btc , seems a ridiculous question considering you can profitability mine it from home, what has caused this total melt down ? H1 22 end June 1953 btc held, 157m in property plant equipment, 136m in current assets with only 64m in current liabilities, so liabilities were clearly covered. Crypto valuation has hardly changed since end June , we now have only 512 btc left ,apparent rights issues, asset selling, why, for what , as liabilities were covered, what has gone so wrong?

Hexam how did you reach this conclusion, where have they ever stated that there aisc was 40k?

Another article in the Times on Synthomer, Numis views it likely that an equity raise will be on the cards in an attempt to repair the balance sheet. In my view an equity raise at such lows would be highly dilutive and improper, Synthomer lower end ebitda now forecast at 280m, i expect profit 140m, this company is not in need of an equity raise with these profits it can pay down its debt, do not dilute share holders.

In the H1 2022 page 19 section 'going concern' it states at the H Y net debt 992m and our covenant ratio was 2.3x neither our forecast nor our severe but plausible downside scenario indicate a debt leverage covenant breach'. Here is the problem , the 2.3x figure stated appears incorrect, that figure amounts to ebitda 431m but HY ebitda was only 173m, I don't understand from where did they add 258m to H1 173m to equate ebitda 431m thus ratio 2.3x, H121? H221 ebitda? FY22 forecast ebitda? The answer appears to be no, this discrepancy i did not notice upon first look and took their figure as accurate and far from the debt covenant limit of 3.5x. The 37% fall for a 10-15% ebitda reduction appeared unreasonable until an article in the Financial Times on Friday stated the reason was because the 10-15% ebitda reduction has put ebitda expectations at 285m, 285m × 3.5 equals 992m or in other words net debt ebitda ratio 3.5x thus breaching the covenant. Its insane that a 10-15% fall in ebitda has breached the covenant, especially after their statements and calculations of ebitda to debt. In their H1 ebitda to debt ratioshould of been presented more accurately at 2.86x on this calculation 173 x 2 =346 and 992 ÷ 346 = 286 x . A 15% reduction from 346 =294 or 3.37x ebitda to debt, very close to the 285 or 3.5x stated in The Times, it appears my calculation is a much more accurate figure. But profit is still good, deleveraging is still possible and this should be controllable,everyone is aware of the rate hikes and global economic slowdown obviously ,even more so directors of a billion pound company, so taking 759m debt in April for an acquisition must of been done with consideration for the obvious economic situation. Without this 759 m, net debt would be 223m thus no concerns of any covenant breaches, from my calculations they appear to have acquired Eastmans on an underlying PE ratio of 10 which appears reasonable, but still quite a large acquisition considering the economic conditions and was not entirely necessary as it was perfectly profitable prior to the acquisition and with a lot less debt.

I recently bought in here before the profit warning at 150p as it looked reasonably valued, considering mcap of 700m, with half year profit of 89m ,eps 19p, the H1 report seemed quite clear and upfront, i read claims of low energy intensity and that no one customer accounted for more than 10% of revenue. I was hoping for FY profit of around 140m or eps of 30p, the HY numbers looked good and the board appeared aware of the macroeconomic situation. Two days after buying they issue a forecast reduction and the sp falls 35%, mcap now 400m, net assets 1.1b, FY ebitda down 10-15% should still see FY profit of around 130m, opinions please, i guess this is just a total bear market right now.

Any chance you could answer my original questions.

Looks like he's still holding 9,325,000.00 shares.

New here and have a couple of questions if someone with knowledge could please help, upon looking at Total assets 379m, Total liabilities 140m, Net assets 239m, I assume that the company had net assets of 239m but upon looking at equity and liabilities it appears only 154m of that figure belongs to the parent company and 85m belongs to a non controlling interest, this I've never seen before, somewhat confused, why are assets of a non controlling interest listed in Total assets of Gem diamonds, is it to give a higher net asset value upon glance 239m but upon closer look the net asset attributable to Gem diamonds are lower 154m. Also why is more profit going to a non controlling interest, profit for the period 9.4m, profit to non controlling interest 4.5m, profit attributable to parent company 3.8m after loss from discontinued operations. Who are or is this non controlling interest and looking upon non controlling interests I cannot see this figure of 4.5m. Separately in liabilities whats with the high tax deferral of 82m, could one also give more information regarding LRA v Letseng, I see waste tonnes mined of 6.3v 10.2 in accordance with mine plan but even with this lower waste mined still produced same amount of ore. Any help would be appreciated took position here as saw mcap 50m, NA 240m and I expect profit to be around 20% of current market cap, didn't look bad just wondered if I've missed anything.