Member Info for HarChris

I wasn’t talking about you as I assumed you were just like everyone else, nursing a loss here having bought near the top and held those shares all the way down. No I was talking about a couple of other posters who talked down Avacta whilst constantly promoting other stocks that fell as much or more than Avacta and in a couple of cases have gone to zero.

GLA

To help conclude whether or not someone's profitable trading here is due to skill and knowledge or just pure luck it's best to look at their record across their portfolio over the same period. From what I can see, most of those claiming to have been 'right' here have seen colossal losses in the stocks they instead championed over the same period which makes me think that it was more luck than skill/knowledge.

Not saying they are doing any worse than anyone else on here but certainly doesn't seem like they have any deeper grasp of the market.

Are you suggesting you think they’re looking for the funding to buy the equipment and build the new circuit to reach the 6g+/t ore? Emma has always said that that is a long way off and follows a process, first ready 1000 ounces and become cash generative, then a second dry plant to increase production further at minimal cost and then look into the bigger expansion.

I’m assuming future funding is for general working capital and capex to simply get to this 1000 ounces target, something that has been pushed back constantly for nearly a year now without explanation… remember at the Indaba interview which took place in February she said ‘within the next couple of months we will be at that 1000 story’ and yet we get a sub 250 ounce June pour.

As for this recent pour and the comment are we to assume the grade isn’t coming through in pit 1?

An investor isn't going to come in until the gold loan is renegotiated with AIMSL. We absolutely need clarity on this front first as it's now a certainty that it won't be met via cash generation this year like it easily would have if they could have got close to 1000 ounces average through H2.

Absolutely. This board is really up against it but I imagine the new targets may well coincide with relisting (a few months time) and so it really is critical they are achieved or at are at least close to achieved.

And then there’s the lithium side of the business, with the world’s largest producer partnering and shouldering all the exploration risk at Lithium Ridge. That’s low risk upside if there ever was such a thing.

V1per I was starting to worry that AV would risk indebting ATM like Fortune did with BMN but then he went ahead and raised this $7m recently and showed he learnt lessons from Fortune - that overleveraging your business can spell the death of you.

When Fortune left BMN in mid 2023 BMN was losing enormous money and sat on net debt of $91m.

Andrada's FY results released later this month will show a net debt figure only a small fraction of what BMNs was and they are now comfortably generating cash with tin price near $34k.

The two situations are not alike for the debt reason above as well as the key commodities in focus here. Vanadium price has been depressed for many years now as it is intrinsically linked to steel demand which has had multi years downturn whereas tin is a commodity with every growing demand and serious global supply issues.

This management team, or at least Emma specifically, have eroded all trust here. We were led to believe that 1000 ounces was always a few months away, I backed that by adding more as the share price fell but it turned out to be false, either intentionally and deceptively or through lack of understanding of the operations. If it's true that they are no longer funded for such a production level then imo she has to go if the share price is ever to fully rerate.

Not to this degree, no never seen continuation at a loss with no cash for half a year without any pause in production. And if it really was the case they would have pushed for an opportunistic raise earlier in 2025 with the share price still strong, even at a sizeable discount.

It’s clear they were generating cash through to at least May, last month’s poor figure might now have got themselves into the sort of position you’re describing but certainly will have been close to profitability this year.

With the debt maturity looming however break even isn’t enough.

As you keep saying but it's more accurate to say 'nothing signposted of significance for the next month' - there are a whole plethora of potential left field rns' at this stage of the trial.

Well how do you explain that they had barely $50k in the bank as of Dec 31st and they have raised no money since and operated all the way through 2025? That’s unheard of for GRL, they historically burnt through £millions per year and were always having to go back to shareholders or creditors for more cash…

The above proves that numbers wise this year has been a massive turnaround but as I keep saying, with gold price so high we could have been talking profit that wiped out the debt and totally transformed the company but these 2050 ounces in six and a half months isn’t enough to have done that.

If you look at Corrumpo's post about the AGM it would seem Bill Trew had shared the details of the recent pour he was aware of and hence it needed to be released in an RNS the following day. We were given details on the 1st July for ytd which included a June pour and averaged out at 370 ounces per month, so the most recent gold pour takes this year's production to over 2000 ounces and far exceeds all of last year's revenue.

But it's still a backwards step and not good enough for a major turnaround.

It’s incredibly frustrating Peggy but this feels like a typical attempt to undermine what was unquestionably good news on Friday. Sure none of us wanted this year to play out in this way, of course it’s not ideal to have an agitator trying to disrupt as much as he can but the investment case is built around the JV and Anglo finding large deposits of economic copper at Arc’s Zambian licences and that is still very much all to play for (and in the near term) yet with the share price at rock bottom.

So despite all that’s gone on before this still looks a great opportunity at this level for the medium term.

‘ What that eventually means for PIs when we sort out production issues and become cash positive? 2b shares in issued? Could be.’

______________

Certainly could and would mean the very long term holders will never see a positive return but for the rest of us would… it’s not impossible to see a future £40m mcap with 2B shares ie 2p share.

Ps Izzy this is partly answering your question.

Alan the next 10 months is crucial for that very reason, the CLN needs repaying. It converts to shares at 9.45p or otherwise it has to be paid in cash. There is therefore a lot riding on this near term expansion being executed successfully.

The targets with the higher feedstock grades are 1900t contained tin this year and 2484t next year. If the second jig plant is implemented successfully and the above is achieved it means significant cash generation both through H2 this year and H1 next year. I would expect the share price to be up and around that 9.45p level if the targets are met & tin price is still $33k or higher.

And even if the share price isn’t high enough to convert given the above the cash position would be either high enough or require just a small raise / new debt funding to meet the maturity.

That’s why the next ten months is critical to the long term shareholder return here.

No Jack, that’s not the same. The statement in the RNS could easily mean (and implies) development of the business beyond the target of 1000 ounces via the second plant and then later to reach the higher grade ore. It was explicitly stated numerous times by Emma that they were funded to 1000 ounces right through until these supposed comments at the AGM.

I’m with you 100% Andrew (&Trek too).

What’s gone is gone, it’s now that we have to ask ourselves if there’s value in sticking or buying more at this 3p level.

Like you say this dilution does ever lower the top end of the upside with (imo) the sort of 30p level looking very unlikely to ever be achieved now - but half that? 15p-20p? Still more than possible based on Empire’s potential and current/likely TVR by the time the financing is eventually sorted.

I’ve always been open to the binary outcomes - I backed Emma eventually delivering (close to) the targets and others argued she’ll continually fail. The latter have been correct it seems and those like me betting on the company have been wrong.

I’ve always been aware of a war, the difference is if they had actually managed to achieve a modest improvement in production output with this gold environment then Emma would have had the resources to battle on and self fund without requiring the approval of the major shareholders.

That it seems is not the case now and hence we’re in a materially worse position than six months ago with the share price capitalisation warranted

I’ve always been aware of a war, the difference is if they had actually managed to achieve a modest improvement in production output with this gold environment then Emma would have had the resources to battle on and self fund without requiring the approval of the major shareholders.

That it seems is not the case now and hence we’re in a materially worse position than six months ago with the share price capitalisation warranted.