Member Info for Fukurokuju79

Agreed Kully.
Regarding your suggestion on scoping study I'm not saying it's not happened that way. Its possible and a valid suggestion.
It's just that the last we heard in December within the AGM update was that they are now assessing proprietary tech.
So sounds like it's still got data and aspects that can further feed into it, rather than finished and not shared. That's all.
Right I'm gonna prop up a fence

CuNY

No problem.

Regarding the company withholding the scoping study because of the court cases Im not sure on that one Kully.

Regarding the shareprice change CuNY I invested before the rise to 8p not on the way up and have always intended to hold (rather than trade). I've added when lower as I believe in the assets.

While frustrating at times I believe the assets are solid as posted previously.
I'm here for more than 8p a share and I think I'll get it with continued patience and progress.

The market does miss opportunities at times. That's where I've personally managers to find and invest in some serious multibaggers. Never any guarantees but if you can't trust yourself to get it right most the time, you can't trust anyone.

Your decision and if your experience, appetite and research is saying it's not for you. Listen to it.
Investment isn't a convince me why I should invest game is it. I turn down most stocks I research, some have been great calls, others have gone on to do okay.

Anyway atb

Yes Ella I am not sure what is in place in terms of authority to issue more shares. Can't be bothered to review AGM stuff ATM but potentially may require shareholder approval.
I think they will take the option if I'm honest but either way the vendor will get something as we will hand over the work package of our project assessment / due diligence.

CuNY

They must be unable to release it for whatever reason. Could be the study needs more data fed into it for completeness, could be linked to negotiation, could be various things.

They've already said historically what they anticipate to be the FCF based on brush stroke figures demonstrating it's economic viability at a headline level. However as you know this piece of work will involve much more detail.
So yes frustrating it's still in progress but all we can do is accept that and use the FCF generation they've mentioned as supporting it is economically viable. Clearly the info to date is just implied and you may want the study to make your own mind up which is fine.
Maybe engage with NvS.
Anyway atb everyone.

Chen

What saying is that the deal isnt based on a fixed cash value but on a fixed share offer within a range. That range being 5p to 8.8p.
However of it falls outside (below or above) this range (based on the 10 day VWAP) then the this would trigger more or less shares.
But to lessen the impact if this happened ...
Kav would pay £1,170,000 worth of shares at the Lower Price to the Vending Shareholders
Or
Kavango will issue £1,875,000 worth of shares at the Upper Price to the Vending Shareholders.

Clearly they can't have it fully 'fixed' as they need the what if scenario covered. Clearly any major swings in 10day VWAP could impact the deal.

Watching this on the news now. Mad I used to hold ukog few years ago. Sold at 11p intraday on a spike. Flash back

No need to forget molopo. Plenty of room to talk about everything.

As I've said I don't support another deal anyway tbh.

Much rather crack on with the in flights for now and new deals down the line.
Atb

The risk (albeit opposite sides) are there for both parties. Current operator gets cash equivalent less on lower share price;kav pay cash equivalent more on high share price.
They accepted it as they've decided to construct the deal on shares irrespective of the short term volatility.
With the tie in the share price risk, and the deal set around shares being fixed, the operator has largely postponed the risk anyway.

Legal

You say...
'My understanding is that under the existing option, if KAV's share price trades above 8.8p, they end up paying much more for the Molopo option (circa £1.8 million). At the moment, they will only need to pay the lower price of 5p for Molopo (circa £1.2 million)?'

In this regard I and Ella etc are saying this is right but they've agreed this at a share issue level. Not value. They've done this IMO to avoid issues during a time of potential share price fluctuation/volatility. It's deliberate so ignore the money the current holder gets. They fixed the shares.

Regarding the deal being at KAVs discretion. Yes KAV haven't entered a binding agreement. They are assessing the project with no commitment at this stage. With outline terms in place.

Regarding what if the price goes to 3p or flies up.
This is what I was referring to in my original post. They have covered this in their approach to the deal but any significant swings could either a) pact the deal not proceeding b) mutual extension of time for KAV to assess or c) amendment to terms.
Atb

Legal I think that what you say has merit and is a factor in any share based arrangement. However I believe this is why Ben T and co have structured the deal as they have (as per our discussion yesterday).
Rather than a fixed monetary value for the deal (which would mean the dilution is susceptible to short term volatility in the share price, particularly with a drill campaign like this over the negotiation / due diligence period). They have instead mutually agreed the heads of terms based on a deal structured around the number of KAV shares (sweetened with warrants albeit they are at a much higher price at 8.8p or whatever).

So while the product of this deal obviously means the shares are worth more or less in monetary terms, by establishing the deal in this way they have pretty much hedged the impact of a rise or fall in share price.
Suggesting the JV parties all see the value in KAV at no less than 5.5p.
Clearly if the price were to tank far below 5.5, or go into orbit, they may need to renegotiate but anything around this price up to 8.5p or so range is factored into the deal already and they don't have much to work out.
Atb

Ella - You can't act the way you do on these boards and throw your toys out when you get called out for it. Its fairly simple stuff. What I post on LSE is genuine, and I have no reason to fabricate anything but honestly what you believe about me is meaningless.
I dislike your methods and styles, but if you want to be that way that is your right, as it is mine to raise awareness of my own views about you. You'll also know I have said many things in support of you i.e. against those that take it too far against you on the other board. I am not the enemy so lets not make me one too.

I wish you well.
Atb

Metal head. This I Ella's modus operandi.
She gains trust and confidence in research and positivity then says she's sold out and turns the negative screw. I've experienced it elsewhere...

Give it up Ella. Show us a new balanced side to your soul.

Anyway not sure I'm with the JV thing. It's possible though. I suspect either nothing visible but they are getting assays, or perhaps they did DHEM and believe the conductor is just off so have come back up a bit and started a new channel and slightly different angle.

Lord knows.
We'll find out in time I guess.

Not sure about tanks Micky; but I've heard the police force need a lot more copper

Micky you're on the windup surely...

Anyway ignore the trade feed on this site it's unreliable. It's got nothing to do with manipulation but more bad code and data feeds.

Mickyt. You post that on the wrong board? Or am I losing the plot?

Material news they will release timely (as required) however general progress and operations will be released in line the pre determined operational update frequency.

I personally think that's the best way as it offers regularity and consistency for shareholders and the company.

Works for me anyway. Appreciate others may have different preferences.

Jdough don't be silly. Besides we know he is out sourcing an elephant, lead rein and alcohol free beer.

Tk95, Ben was fairly certain on not going deeper than planned in this hole and Im sure I recall Ben saying they were on target directtionally to intercept as planned.
However I agree they must still be drilling as I believe they would either RNS on completion or stopping the drill.
They could have had drill complications and changed the angle slightly, plus DHEM. Or perhaps didn't intercept and did DHEM and wedge like you say.

We'll find out soon enough now I guess.

Have a good day all.

Cash I agree with all that and have been saying the same for sometime.

While it won't make a blind bit of difference to speculate, and I generally haven't, it's the most important drill ever for KAV. So I can understand why people will speculate at this stage, especially given the unusual silence.

Nothing wrong in that. Harmless.

Atb

I'm not selling up as I've a cushioned average and as I've said I'm here for more than one drill.

However given the elapsed time, if I were to favour one view over another on the current situation, I think I'd probably be on the side no news potentially meaning they didn't find what they'd expected.
Clearly this would require additional analysis and interpretation and would explaina delay in no news as it's not like Ben/KAV.
Not finding what they expected could be good or bad but I suspect they've got a curve ball of some sort to deal with.
Seems a little too long to be related to drill conditions alone.

Car crash in the markets today. KAV did well really.