Member Info for HarChris

So your main argument for them only being able to raise £16m is actually that they could have raised more but didn’t because they knew it would be received negatively by the market? Gotcha.

Personally I think CC would put the future of the company first and just go and raise more if she wasn’t confident of what’s to come. There’s no point appeasing shareholders for five minutes only to fail a few months down the line.

I think it's useful to acknowledge that this bb has become almost universally positive. The one person left persistently sharing their less positive interpretation of events has gone from wondering if a 10p raise could be on the cards to now predicting '£1 relatively soon'.

If that's not progress i'm not sure what is!

Let's break it down:

Evidence pointing in Avacta's favour:

(i) A history of raising much higher amounts with the company at a much earlier, less mature stage

(ii) Two previous subscriptions this year raising the minimum each time

(iii) Christina previously stressing that deals would come alongside p1b data and this getting them through to full p1b data readout

iv) The placing being oversubscribed. I agree this isn't a compelling factor but it still adds to the case.

Now reasons that they were forced to raise just £16m with no further funding being available:

A feeling?

Anyone that’s following the developments since Hughes took on the director role and is still sat here scratching their head as to the reason Avacta raised £16m and not £46m is a bit dense.

Sure there’s always other possibilities but the weight of evidence points towards it being a choice (and the positive connotations of that) rather than forced. If you want 100% certainties AIM small cap investing should be the last sphere you enter into.

I’m with you Thorn here. Wyn is tying himself in knots to find a negative angle. If you’d asked shareholders before whether they’d prefer minimal dilution like we’ve seen or a massive raise we all know the vast majority would have chosen what we got.

The 50p raise under AS came following a recent £1.50 high and still the share price swiftly went to 20% lower (40p). This one has been met with immediate modest appreciation despite only being a fraction off recent highs. Light and day.

I am absolutely certain if they had raised £40m at 63p you’d be writing long posts about how it’s obviously good that they are funded but that they clearly aren’t expecting any commercial validation, any deals or partnerships and how we probably shouldn’t expect much from the SGC data next month. And therefore overall you conclude that the prognosis is bad. And tbh I’d be feeling more or less the same.

Raising the minimum to satisfy Heights and extend the timeline for landing a commercial deal alongside the full p1b data is therefore a major positive. I find that hard to argue against.

Let’s take our cues from the market Wyn. If this had fallen to sub placing price we all know that would be read as there being no demand and a negative omen. Instead it’s 8% above placing price and looking more likely to break out higher than revert back to 63p.

Back to your question… they either couldnt raise more than £16m or chose not to because they expect the next six months to be transformational. Based on the fact Avacta raised tons more at 50p when they were at a far less advanced stage (P1a dragging on vs p1b almost complete) and that under Hughes they have twice before raised the minimum they needed at the time (two Heights payments) it is far more likely that it’s the latter.

There is no way of being 100% of the answer unless you’re in the boardroom but logic tells us the most likely answer and the share price action points that way too. You can either sit there scratching your head puzzled or keep buying and enjoying the ride north :)

So you keep saying, day after day multiple times…

£23m has been raised, there’s a decent chance a couple of institutions have taken a sizeable chunk and we’ll find out once these shares hit the market.

Others might be waiting for efficacy confirmation from the larger 1b dataset which is with us very soon. Possibly within four weeks.

Meeting the CEO of a small cap company isn’t like getting an audience with the pope, it just requires showing up to AGMs and conferences.

If they are looking to create a dual bitcoin/gold exposure company i'm not quite sure why they are relinquishing up to 100% of Nimba for what is peanuts? I get that the deal came earlier in the year when they were cash strapped but it isn't auspicious as to their gold outlook.

It was barely 5 trading days ago that the placing landed and quashed the momentum, also signalling a low chance of a very near term commercial deal.

I expected it to take at least a few weeks til we were back in the 70s and beyond and yet it almost happened yesterday, within a week. A very good sign if you ask me. Share price will continue to trend higher and higher as we head towards christmas and p1b data readout with enthusiasm re a commercial deal picking up again too.

Probably better to not overthink it and just know there will be times when it's crazy overvalued (think 50 x mNAV!) and times when it's crazy undervalued (can't say for sure but probably look back with hindsight as this being that time).

If the jig plant operates 40kt Uis ore to begin with and performs optimally then we will see the Orion royalty reduced dramatically still and it’s likely the plant produces modestly profitably. So with the tin price so high I do consider Andrada at least a bit derisked and capable of seeing profit from Uis alone but it’s the higher grade ore that takes them from potentially at best a few $m profit per quarter to multiples of that.

Huge upside comes from Goantagab, it comes from SQM making a discovery at Lithium Ridge, it comes from a lithium price recovery and further upside would come from catalysts positioning Andrada to actually develop Brandberg West.

Massive potential upside remains but it’s out of reach for the time being unfortunately.

Right now at this very present time, at group level Andrada is likely breaking even / possibly even slightly profitable at $35k BTC. That’s of course looking past the recent sunk capex and taking it from this point in time. But it shows that the deep losses are stemmed whilst capex requirements are low and tin price performs as it is.

Progress near term almost entirely rests on Goantagab decision now. At current tin price Andrada will be profitable with the new jig plant split between existing Uis ore and Goantagab no matter what the commissioning proves the recovery rate to be for the jig plant. And if anything near 70% Andrada will be highly profitable at the group level and start paying down big chunks of the debt almost instantly.

But of course at the moment there’s absolutely no guarantees of the government siding with the mining interests vs existing tourism, conservation and ecological interests. And the longer it goes on the less benefit we see from this terrific you backdrop.

28j thanks, I didn’t notice the 1-1 warrants to existing holders pre-placing. So overall there’s more warrants at 0.8p than current TVR? Thats a challenging situation to overcome with sentiment lacking for treasury companies to start with.

A few months ago. A few weeks ago. Last week. Soon!

Almost certainly not in my opinion Nesty. The jig plant is deemed as a major milestone for Andrada, when commissioned we are definitely due an rns as well as detail on recovery rate etc

I'm really not convinced that 'potential for immediate, significant increase in tin production and therefore enhanced cash flow' from the 12th February rns where the new plant was first mentioned was meaning to take 9 months time.

Been taking a look here but from what I can see Hamak has just 20 BTC equalling £1.7m, right? They raised at 0.8p and now alongside it there's 308m warrants at the same price and then went on to see share price spike to 7.5p all within the month of July without take any advantage of that to raise any additional funds. So for now from a pure mNAV stance they are trading at a 4.2X premium if going by that metric alone. Obviously that's misleading as there's the Nimba project that looks promising and could result in 471m FAU shares (and later many more through milestones) which would be £2.07m at current FAU share price or assuming a 50% rise over time more like £3.1m.

So am I right in saying that the investment case here is entirely centred on the appointments made? Of Laffer attaching his (highly reputable) name to Hamak alongside other prominent bitcoin folk? And with it / in combination with the At-The-Market placing catch a tailwind and go on another run like in July?

For now with treasuries being so out of favour it seems like timing might just go against Hamak re CLN and ATM, at the very least certainly do need more detail as to future plans.

Nesty, not what I said if you’re replying to me. The fact that the jig plant wasn’t commissioned meant that we weren’t processing Goantagab ore is what I said.

The jig plant came before the securing of high grade Goantagab ore so I assume that Andrada would still put it to full use with or without the higher grade ore… it would be obviously much less lucrative though.