Proposed Directors of Tirupati Graphite explain why they have requisitioned an GM. Watch the video here.
I’ve gone over the time-lapse of RNS’s that “earningacrust” kindly put on the board, but all I’ve done is summarise the relevant points.
RNS dated 18th March. We have sufficient cash to fund the acquisition of Redmoor.
RNS dated 13th May. Contracts signed with an agreed settlement date of 30 May 2019.
RNS dated 24th May. Potential receipt of US $4,065,000 within two weeks.
RNS dated 29th May. Defer payment to NAE until 27 June to allow funds from Cobre client.
It clearly states March 18th we had the cash to buy out NAE’s 50%, group cash balance was US$1.240m as at 31 March 2019, still no cash problem on the 13th May when we sign the purchase contract, so what happened to all the cash in the two weeks between May 13th and 29th??.
The potential receipt of US $4,065,000 was price sensitive information, so they shouldn’t have even known about it on the 13th May when they signed the contract, if they did then they would have had to tell us about it, so to defer the purchase payment because the client didn’t pay the $4,065,000, just doesn’t make sense.
Probably because as the biggest shareholders their holding would be diluted' even though it was only a very small dilution you would want their blessing, so obviously they gave their support for the raising.
I may be wrong but that's how I read it.
Not a problem Toze.
Everything I put in my post I got from the RNS see below.
Highlights
· Placing supported by the Company's largest existing shareholder, the Manners family (That states "supported" not participated)
· Participation by three directors, two employees and a consultant. (Obviously that is the order in which they were offered, directors would have had 1st refusal.)
Alan Broome, Chairman of Strategic Minerals, commented:
"This modest placing has been undertaken as we await the anticipated receipt of over US$4 million
Alan Broome refereed to the raise as "This modest placing" and yet the Manners family didn't want to participate even at 1.40, only 3 directors put money in but obviously not enough, so then ask 2 employees to chip in but still not enough, so ask a consultant who isn't even an employee to chip in.
If it was only a "modest" raise at such a good discount, why does it smack of desperation looking at the people they eventually got to buy in.
To be honest that RNS sounded more like a script for the TV program, send in the bailiffs. I don't believe sml will ever see that money, but no doubt the major client got a good price for buying the quantities outlined in the initial contract, so they could actually take what they have already paid for and sell it to some of sml's current customers, that way they get back their money and the customers probably get it cheaper than from sml.
I thought the deal to buy the other 50% share of the tin mine was sorted before the 4ml reared it's ugly head, so how were they going to pay for it?
I lost a bit of faith in JP over how the initial information about the major client was dealt with, also in how this money raise has been dealt with, don't they realise that it's not what you do that counts, but the way that you do it.
Slurm, "Companies don't write letters of intent to buy time"
"anticipates having significant funds very shortly and has asked SMG to refrain from progressing legal action for two weeks"
That sounds like buying time to me!
dv, I just feel that the RNS 24 May 2019 has too many if's and but's, plus it's full of good intentions made by the client.
The major client has informed SMG that it "ANTICIPATES" having significant funds very shortly
The major client has "INDICATED" that it wishes to negotiate the balance of the contract
SMG has now received written confirmation of the major client's "INTENT" to make payment
At the end of all these three statements from the RNS, you could actually put the words "They might or They might not"
I suppose it's just a case of lets wait and see what happens.
I sold out of SML at the begging of March and put it all into CGH, last week I sold out of CGH with roughly a 19% profit and looking to put it all back into SML. My theory is (rightly or wrongly) that if!! the money is paid then the share price won't move, purely because it's been stated and expected to be paid, but!! if it's not paid when they expect it to be paid, then the share price will take a hit.
This big customer has already defaulted in the past so can't trust them 100%, so it's not a done deal until they actually cough up the cash, hence I won't be buying back in until the cash hits the bank, just airing on the side of caution.
Lekka, what is in the RNS about non payment doesn't quite make sense, it states the major client hasn't paid $0.375m payment due in the quarter, but which quarter?? the original deal as I remember was that they paid the money up front, the last payment due on the original agreement was 31st December 2018, which would have covered the client to the end of March 2019. but if they have!! paid last Decembers money then no payment was due in the 1st quarter 2019, because they would have been paid up to the 31st March.
It also states in the RNS "Demand for payment from the major client has been issued" but that can't relate to the 4000 tonnes per month for April because we are not at the end of the month yet, so it must relate to the payment they should have made by December 31st 2018, even so that would have appeared in 4th qtr 2018 accounts and not 1st qtr 2019.
People on here have said when the major client returns the share price will go to 2p to 2.5p, but what do we think the share price will do if the RNS (when it comes) is negative, with the major client just walking away.
This bit doesn't impress me.
After ten years of research and exploration works on the Chaarat gold field, the Chaarat Zaav CJSC has to proceed directly to its development. In October, special equipment was delivered for construction of a gold mining factory. The company planned to receive the first gold by the end of 2020.
“Unfortunately, in 2020 there will be no gold,” Alexander Novak, the company’s Board chairman said. The obstacle is the ban on the cutting of especially valuable tree species, including junipers. The law on the abolition of this ban was adopted in 2015, but the government’s decree on bringing it into force has not yet been adopted. The company is ready to compensate for damage in the case of cutting down junipers and start construction.
Monday, 3rd December 2018 | 3:48:24 PM
Facebook - Times of Central Asia
Kyrgyzstan: How to make the mining sector investor friendly.
https://www.timesca.com/index.php/news/20560-kyrgyzstan-how-to-make-the-mining-sector-investor-friendly
Amongst shareholders on this site the consensus of opinion seems to be that, you need to watch JP's video at least twice to fully understand what he's actually saying, which is fine for us that are already invested, because we have the need to know about our investment, but investor Joe Bloggs is going to watch it once and come up with a totally different perspective than us.
Ideally if a placing might be required for LCCM because it's bigger/better than expected, then surely you would wait until you actually know it's bigger/better and release both bits of news together, otherwise a "placing" is purely a bit of hypothetical information.