St 🤡1 Aug 2025 08:01
Let’s clear up a few major factual errors here:
1. “Diamonds are worth $18 million — not enough to pay the debt”
→ This is speculative and outdated. The $18m figure was floated before the two-stage beneficiation process, which has now dramatically increased the visible gem quality yield. The diamonds are currently undergoing final sorting, and initial visuals show substantial uplift in clarity, colour, and size visibility, which will significantly raise valuations. Vast has explicitly stated that post-beneficiation, many previously “industrial” stones are now grading as near-gem or full gem quality.
Even using conservative valuation bands of $300–$600/ct for gem and near-gem material (well below polished price), and assuming 30–50% gem conversion, the value could easily surpass $30m–$50m, far exceeding the company’s total debt liabilities.
2. “Debt is higher than diamond value”
→ The total known secured debt sits at around $8–10 million, including the Atlas facility and Mercuria obligations. Additional short-term liabilities and payables exist but do not approach $18 million, and some are already being reduced via repayments from recent placings and warrant exercises.
Also worth noting: $2.7 million was raised recently, and £1.8m worth of warrants were exercised — bolstering cash flow and pushing down net debt further.
3. “Asset valuers are for liquidation”
→ The presence of asset assessors and consultants is standard practice during beneficiation and strategic reviews. The RNS explicitly states that Vast is evaluating how to maximise value through end-to-end processing, not winding down operations. If there were formal liquidation proceedings, it would be legally required to announce this under AIM disclosure rules.
Furthermore, AP said in the latest interview that they are preparing for tenders in “weeks, not months,” not liquidating.
4. “AP riding off with a fortune”
→ AP, like many executives, holds a sizeable equity position and deferred salary, and would only benefit if the company succeeds and the share price rises. His own incentives (including SARs) are worthless unless the share price sustains growth well above the current level over time — based on VWAP, not spot price.
5. “Price lift was manufactured”
→ The midweek spike followed real buying pressure and optimism around the beneficiation results. The market then retraced as some short-term traders took profits — not uncommon in small caps. Suggesting this was "manufactured" without evidence is just baseless conspiracy.
---
Summary:
This kind of fear-mongering ignores all nuance, skips real data, and reads like someone hoping others will sell so they can buy cheaper. If you genuinely believe your claims, back them up with sourced figures, not guesswork.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
