Member Info for honestbob

Is very good point and hopefully if something physical actually takes place then price will price to mitigate effect and size of the dilution

The whole affair appears a little squalid - either shareholders were treated fairly at the time or they were not If they were it was an investment risk and everyone should receive nothing -why should todays shareholders pay out if this was the case. If not all should be treated equally and compensated . There will old and vulnerable people who held shares for whatever reason - who may well not have had the confidence understanding or resources to join an action group Or they were not treated fairly in which case all who took part in the rights issue should receive the same compensation One would have thought that the Bank would have clear records of all that happened when the rights issue were made so its present directors should know one way or another Unless it really is not clear in which case I would say that if the Bank cannot clearly show it acted properly it should do the decent thing I did not take up ant rights so have no axe to grind . By settling pout of court , having dragged matters out , the uncertainty will remain and fester .The bank had the opportunity to move as quickly as possible to go to a court case to demonstrate its innocence .

I am having to be careful because I really do not want anyone to become confident with any of my postings - because much as I like the share I am well aware it is very high risk To answer the question - depending on what plant or equipment purchased - some or all of it could be through an asset finance provider - in a form of HP where the lender would retain ownership until the finance cleared. In this instance good second hand plant , dependent on age , could be easier to finance than new. It would not have such a steep depreciation in event of repossession. Clearly some of fixed plant would be unsellable but asset finance provider would still retain title. The free hold of the site could also be pledged as security - what its value is I wouldn t know and realistically a significant part of the borrowing would technically not be covered by the security value . This is why I think a lender might consider staging the finance as the mine develops - with agreed draw down milestones. Which would mean that possibly in the early stages they would be secured and as the borrowing out stripped the pledged security they would come nearer to the mine coming on line and commencing pay back This also enables the lender to monitor progress that progress is proceeding according to plan Security etc apart, any lender will look at the overall proposition - character of the principals and experience and robustness of financial payback projections - with secondary figures to show effect of mineral price fall during loan payback. The lender / lenders themselves will then either decline any involvement - or if they think the proposition has a good chance of success will then price their loan or finance line to give them a good return and reflect the risk and their own fund costs. As far as possible I think forward sales of some of production would be encouraged to minimise risk due to price volatility. Interestingly if a lender raises £ 50 million at say 2 percent and then lends to the company at 8 % The cost to them on one year is £1 million pound and the return £4 million - which is perhaps an a little more detail as to why a lender might be interested . Clearly they have the risk of losing a large proportion of their loan if the project does not work out .

Is a fair point why would anyone provide 50 million of finance when for an additional 5 million could reap all the rewards Possibly if the company could be bought for 5 million that would be the way forward for some one In practice to gain control of the company would need 51 % of the shares and for compulsory take over regardless of dissension I think 90 % Given that buy orders of few hundred thousand shares can see quite large spikes unlikley that purchases of over 100 million shares ( to get near the 50 % for control ) would not shoot price up Also think we need to remember that Juno own approx 30 % of the shares and I suspect they have not held them this long to let them go very cheaply In short whilst capitalisation is presently £5 million - I think that if large buy orders came in to precede takeover it would rise quite appreciably. That said perhaps the take over could happen , as you say, might well be worth another mining company - with its own internal infrastructure and possibly surplus plant make an offer big enough to tempt Juno and the other shareholders - but I think this would need to be 15 p plus and possibly more . Apart from Juno I think remaining shareholders are quite widely spread and significant proportion LTH In this as in so many other areas I am probably wrong but amusing to speculate in a period of inactivity

You are right in that there would not be a loan to a company that was loss maker - if that was projected to continue Loan will only be forthcoming if there are realistic and robust projections to demonstrate serviceability of the loan and profits Company is technically loss making, at present ,because it has fixed overheads and no trading income to cover them - in practice it is currently semi dormant so not unexpected that there will be more expenditure than income. To date this has been financed by the companys largest shareholder - which would seem to indicate that they have some confidence in being paid back eventually All now hinges on the financial projections produced following the scoping report and how they are interpreted by lenders - etc Interesting times and shares are obviously not risk free but also potential more upwards movement - as shown by recent 7p spike

Mm - you may be right and possible will be difficult or not forthcoming, equally possible lenders have been sounded out prior to the cost and time of the report But to answer your question as to why some one would provide a loan and not take over the company Banks and finance companies make loans - that is what they do - they do not tend to buy mines and attempt to run them . There is not an unlimited demand for loans - so they will look at all propositions helping where they can walking away where they cannot They would study scoping report and business plan showing projected income generation - if happy that looked realistic would take expert advice and then make lending decision and price appropriately. Loan could be provided in stages as works progress - lenders full exposure then would come just before production You often make some good points it is a pity you often do it , intentionally or otherwise , in a confrontational manner.

Not remotely confused - have said all along financial arrangements needed or price could go either way Fairly apparent even to a person of my limited intellect although was possible that news could have come alongside scoping report I think the confused chap is the one that has posted to say that he has not posted

I have few shares and hope you are right . But I have learnt never to under estimate RBS ability to produce yet another skeleton from a cupboard ! Is about 8 years after Goodwin it is time now all problems were identified costed and sorted - hopefully they have been

I think you have summed up really well Another point is we do not see a never ending stream of rights issues to pay inflated directors salaries ( directors do not currently take a salary) Al is taking place in a stable and local part of the world, as you say ,so what is predicted (subject to finance) I think is very likely to happen

I noticed that as the price shot up the chap you refer to as the RT was notably silent - but was then wise after the event Difficult to know what drives him - fairly apparent that if finance not obtained then share price drop and trundle along in low pennies as before - if it is it will rise Personally I suspect that before going to all the trouble and expense of the reports Bill and team will have sounded out financiers to see if there was any point in progressing the report Whilst one could not accuse the BOD of showing undue haste in what they do - they have always appeared experienced competent and prudent There can be knowledge and sense in what MM says sometimes although why he has singled out this particular company to council the shareholders remains a mystery

I find your spreadsheet figure very interesting and accept they are gross value. I think a predicted net profit of about 20 million pounds is not bad for a company with a capital of only 9 million pounds It may be for a limited period but makes no allowance for inferred minerals or granesberg Costings I believe are all with new plant to be prudent where as Mr Kearney recently,I think indicated second hand for some remains a possibility

I don't understand these things very well but wonder , in absence of a better explanation, if drop is a markdown to trigger stop losses to meet a buying overhang

I think the say the figures are laid outing the RNS are confusing but common sense dictates that soley post is pretty much snow accurate interpretation - if company going to raise 50 million from one source or another there would be no point unless income generated would be at least couple hundred million

Think will be right at end of moth and that if it is more of same price could go either way hopefully it will not be more of the same and brents long awaited cape canaveral scenario will materialise

If anyone interested a google search on - Royal Bank of Scotland investigation: the full story of how the 'world's biggest bank' went bust - brings up a very readable version of the events It is clear that Goodwin with little experience of banking was largely out of his depth There was a highly paid board of directors who should have seen this Similarly very senior figures in the bank ought to have seen some of his ideas were dangerous , but did not speak out . I think Steven Hester quickly got a real grasp on the problem and could have pulled off a turn around sadly he was replaced

i hope you are right and if end of July update gives some information about finance and date of ground break you may well be . In fact from past performance your estimate in short term might be on low sided But if RNSt simply details minerals at Parys with some noises about development then I suspect price will muddle along as it is now , with possibly a small dip

you ask one old man if i asked your friend which road to take - what would he say then follow the opposite route that has had me thinking for some time !

I dont think so has been end of month for last few years Personally I think if it contains positive news re funding and commencement will help price greatly . If simply is report update and vague comments about future plans then I don t think a lot will happen until funding announced.

Halfmist right company's don't go bankrupt - they become insolvent. This when liabilities exceed assets - pretty much the same thing That is what happened with ill fated rights issue and HMG bought 40 billion odd of shares to prop RBS up

However you wish or dont wish to describe yourself you are a very valued contributor