Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
TwoGood2Die
My best guess is that the SP will remain relatively static to where it is now - in the short term, until we have any news.
But during the tender offer there are two options and two positions a shareholder can take:
1. Don’t take up the offer, believing that there is not enough value in the offer of 24p
2. Take up the offer selling up the 38.5% of holding (or potentially more) believing that there is value in the offer of 24p.
I appreciate that the market doesn’t just freeze but tell me which of the above shareholder types will be prepared to sell at 17p immediately post tender offer??
TwoGood2Die
I understand all this. But can you answer the questions…..having not sold out at 24p or having sold a large tranche at 24p…..who will be prepared to sell their shares at 17.5p???
The value is only what someone is prepared to sell / buy at.
TooGood2Die
“ Hence how will the apportioning of buyback over the 38.5% level be divvied up could LOAM for instance get most of their shares bought back at 24p for them then to reinvest at a far lower cost post buyback at sub 17p because when you take the cash pot out of the question there is very little if any value attached to the underlying organic business.”
This takes me back to my previous point though…..if PIs aren’t prepared to sell out at 24p and LOAM / other ii’s take the lion’s share of the 38.5% on the offer….then who is going to be selling ANY shares to LOAM / other ii’s at 17p post tender??!!
……after previously promising to break down competitors screens to assess IP theft but then not breaking down the Apple Vision Pro following launch……that they suddenly decide to break down the Vision Pro shortly after the conclusion of the tender offer? 🤔
But surely the saturation of stock PLUS the drop in cash has all been priced in to the current SP? My hunch would be that the SP would remain pretty static (in the short term at least, post tender)
However, as you rightly point out - who knows what the movement of money will look like and what the ii’s have up their sleeves - we’ve had plenty of surprises as pi’s - most of them pretty unpleasant.
Kooba - I’m not arguing with your calcs and very much appreciate your work here.
We all know how much sentiment can play a role in any SP and I’m just struggling to see who in their right mind would sell at 16p having just knocked back 24p or indeed just sold a portion of their stock at 24p. Especially knowing that the shares in issue have just been reduced by nearly 40%!!
But a share is also only worth what a seller is prepared to sell it for Kooba. So my question is - which holders will be happy to sell at 16p having declined 24p or having just sold a tranche of their holdings for 24p??
I’m struggling to get my head around how the post tender price would be this low. Why would any sellers be prepared to sell at 16-17p immediately after not taking the 24p offer? Even if they had taken the offer and maxed out on their 38.5% then I still can’t see how they’d then sell at a drop.
Has anyone else had a corporate action come through on their account regarding accepting the tender offer BUT not regarding voting for the 2 resolutions at the General Meeting?
I don’t appear to have the option to vote for or against the resolutions just decide what the do with my shares!
“ A lifelong environmental campaigner and commentator on all things related to the energy and sustainability sectors.”
Graham Cooley just doesn’t sound like the sort of individual who would take a risky and morally questionable approach of pump and dump in a way that would cause PIs to potentially lose everything. I believe he has a plan.
Good luck tomorrow all holders. And block out all the noise!
This is Dr Cooley’s LinkedIn Profile - doesn’t scream of pump and dump merchant to me….
About
Graham has over 35 years' experience at the forefront of new technology introduction in the power, energy storage and hydrogen sectors. A proven deal maker with a track record of structuring and closing corporate deals. A proven fundraiser, having raised over £600m for technology companies from sources including venture capital, private equity, public investment markets, strategic corporates and grant bodies. A lifelong environmental campaigner and commentator on all things related to the energy and sustainability sectors.
Graham has a PhD in physics, an MBA, and is a Fellow of the Energy Institute (FEl), The Institute of Metals, Minerals and Mining (FIMMM), and The Institution of Engineering and Technology (FIET) and was awarded the Lifetime Fellowship Award by The Bessemer Society.
……that someone with the career that Dr Cooley seems to have had would be loading up with a speculative pump and dump attempt. No way. There is clearly a plan here. The loss is probably peanuts for Canaccord in the grand scheme of things and they likely have somewhere else to place their chips.
Troublesome - me too that’s why I wanted to get a profile of who that actually consulted with. My actual request for him is below:
“Could you please also confirm, out of those 20+ shareholders, how many were:
a) Institutional Investors
b) Private Investors but Nanoco Employees
c) Private Investors - not Nanoco Employees”