Member Info for GreenWolf

Aerial - just for some balance, where have you taken the "fact" from in your 7:16am post?

I find it much clearer, and without any doubt, to simply cut and paste the wording from the RNS

"The Company has recommenced discussions with the Tanzanian Government and recently been invited to submit an unsolicited proposal for the supply of coal to an on-site power station owned and operated by the Tanzanian Government. The Tanzanian Government power planning programme shows the need for a base load plant by 2026."

The fact is that the power planning programme shows a need for a base load plant by 2026. I read this that the TZ Govt are looking at options to how they bring increased base load power to the improved grid. They haven't confirmed a need to build, own and operate a power plant specifically at our site. We have brokered that as an option and will submit a proposal. It's a very subtle but very important difference.

It's also worth understanding the commercial definition of "unsolicited proposal". This idea is clearly being driven by us, not TZ Govt.

The RNS from 2 March 2015 is worth a read / reminder.
Personally I don't really see what has changed much in over six years, apart from the fact we've kicked off the mining first.
If it was a new and exciting de elopment, the market would have reacted.

There's also no volume, which tells its own story.

Esquimo - and there in your post lies our problem - seem, suggest...that is not what the market wants. We've exhausted our reasons / excuses and it's only certainty that will really drive our share price.

I don't recall the posting you mention, but I was a shareholder before we became Edenville in March 2010.

Aerial - it's still just talk, noise, potential etc.
We've been talking about the power plant since 2013. We've been talking about x'000 tonnes of coal since 2017.
The market is sick of it - look at our share price.

The reference to base load is simply that the plant would be in continuous operation providing the base demand / load to the grid, as opposed to power plants that come online to manage peak demand. I don't see that as anything other that what we have always planned for any RCPP? I thought all coal fired plants were base load, as they can't just be switched on and off easily like, say, wind or solar.

Are those the same discussions we reported in the 3rd March RNS
"In addition, the Company has received new East African enquiries regarding power generation capacity and is continuing discussions with the Tanzanian Government regarding a future power plant development at Rukwa."

And all the talk in our RNSs during 2013, 2014, 2015 about the RCPP….talk is cheap, actions are expensive.

Whatever is said on these boards has zero influence on our share price. The share price is driven by market sentiment and our tangible progress as a company.

esquimo - I for one didn't expect any major sell off or substantial change in the share price from our annual results. But we didn't get any rise either. For me theose figures were already priced in at this level.
That means that any upside in our operational performance should send the shareprice in the right direction.
But that operational performance is the key, like it's been for almost 4 years.

I'd have thought if Liberty were going to take us out then they would have done it by now.
There were great opportunites last year at less than half of our current share price

But, surely the price of coal is based upon it's calorific value? The Newcastle standard is 6,000 kcal/kg (25MJ/kg).

Our coal is classified as ‘Grade C’ Bituminous Thermal Coal. I've not checked the calorific values in the JORC RNSs as yet.

Teaye - I'm not really fussed about the noise around orders - we've had it all before; 2018 is littered with RNSs with orders and if you're interested have a look at the Offtake agreement we originally had with Riftcot (10 Oct 2017 RNS) for up to 75% of our output...that went nowhere.

It's sales, revenue and then the small issue of margin.

I do have very slight concerns around our product - there is an interesting bit in the Annual Results about our Coal - page 63 of the PDF doc on the website. It talks about our current inventories, which don't seem to have changed much in value over 2020. That suggests to me we haven't really sold much of our stockpiles? Why is that? And why are some of our orders "trial" orders and "subject to satisfactory performance"?

Possibly exciting times, but we have been here (many times) before. GLA

Our annual loss had to narrow.

We were closed as a business for at c4months of the year for Covid so we would expect lower costs of sales and admin costs in the P&L, potentialy c two thirds, although that's propobably a bit over simplified. Looks like our Directors took their full salaries in 2020...

But you can see the impact being closed for probably half of the dry season and a bad wet season had - the drop in revenue from £233k to £34k is catastrophic. Didn't we also have annual production figures in the 2018 and 2019 Annual Report - have I missed those in our 2020 report?

It would have been nice to get a bit more of a flavour for 2021 H1 in terms of production, sales etc, although we should have those detailed figures in September. The market has reacted exactly as expected. No change. Those 2020 P&L figures were already priced in.

But.....it's not about last year, it's about 2021 Q3 and if we want the share price to really take off, we need some positive updates occassionally from the BoD. We don't have terribly good form on that.
No pressure at all Alistair.

Covid stopped our operations on site for just under 4months – we’ve been mining since the beginning of August, almost 11 months. Allegedly the bigger issue has been the handover to ILTL being delayed due to Covid. That was planned for 1 September 2020, then the 60days mobilisation was mentioned and we moved to 1 November, then a bit more delay due to work permits - now it's nearly July 2021....and we don't have a date at all.

ILTL were also meant to be an anchor tenant, purchasing 3,000t per month initially rising to 5,000t - where is that mentioned in yesterday’s RNS? Are ILTL getting ready to pull out? And what is “satisfactory performance” – I assume we know what the calorific value of our main asset is? Or aren’t we sure? Or is it a problem?

The real recent positive is getting rid of Lind and the CLF, albeit via yet another placing.

In reality since October 2017 we have achieved the square root of nothing in terms of building either a profitable business or shareholder value, while spending in the region of probably £6m+ doing it.

The time for talking about orders (the 2018 RNSs are littered with orders – whatever happened to Riftcot and the coal offtake agreement for up to 75% of our output?), CPP (which currently has no funding and no build programme) etc is well passed - Alistair needs to deliver profitable operations and Q3 is absolutely crucial for us as a business.

Pi - it simply proves it's just another excuse from our BoD.

esquimo - my feeling is it isn't us thinking it's not a good deal, it's more ILTL getting jittery that if we can't get to at least a decent sales output (3,000t per month plus) then they're potentially going to struggle too.

I simply don't believe that Covid / work permits etc etc have had this much impact on the handover. The reference to the 3,000t is the second bit of information that they seem to have innocently left out - the other being about the 60day mobilisation period.

Let's hope July is transformational, but we don't exactly have a glowing track record as a company on this.

Jezzac - "RNSs have always over promised and underdelivered and todays RNS is no different"
This is AIM - were you expecting any different?!!

Seriously, you are spot on - we've all banged on about it's time to deliver over the last few years. And we're still saying it.

esquimo - we were planning on achieving 10,000t per month by January 2018.

It's the usual BoD wording in our RNSs - expecting, subject to, indicated, positive sentiment - I just want them to deliver and stop talking about it.

Pi - I don't read it quite that clinically. There was clearly an issue around handover created by Covid, but that only goes so far with me.

I suspect there has always been something in the agreement around us being able to demonstrate to ILTL that a breakeven scenario is possible. That 3,000t is interesting, as we have cited 4,500t previously as a business for breakeven so that starts to inform the business model and working out margins etc.

The fact this 3,000t has only just been communicated doesn't reflect well, notably as I'm not aware we have ever managed to get to an average of 3,000t.

Pi - That's how I read it

esquimo - I do get a sense of deja vu when we discuss these things on here.....!

esquimo - not sure about another raise - we've done well over £3m already in 2021 - how much more money do they need?

For me though the seeing is believing - we've had plenty of RNSs in the past talking about orders, tonnage etc. For a company that said in October 2017 it was targetting 10,000t per month by January 2018, we're still waiting.

But, at least we have an update.