Member Info for hxulcolrdoh

EV issues -

INCREASED CARBON EMISSIONS: over it's life time an EV with decent range will be responsible for MORE NOT LESS carbon emissions than an ICE (explained in 90s below). Considerably more 'stuff' needs to be mined, refined, processed and manufactured to create an EV. On the road there may be zero emissions but these will probably just have been moved to the nearest fossil fuel power station.

RANGE ANXIETY: For longer journeys the recharging infrastructure is poor and the overall experience is a highly unsatisfactory. It takes a long time to charge a battery. If there is a queue it will take even longer. Where multiple stations the available load is probably reduced and shared amongst the stations. To interact with the station you may well have to 'download an App' and register with numerous service providers.

TYRES: EV batteries are extremely heavy (Eg Kia EV6 : 477.1Kg). Electric motors are more powerful than their ICE equivalents. Put the two things together an you have a vehicle that will chew through expensive tyres.

FIRE HAZARD EV batteries are a massive fire hazard. Considerable effort is taken to mitigate the risks but it is always there.

INSURANCE: Any damage that might compromise a battery will require an extremely expensive battery replacement. Minor shunts can turn into total write off’s (a replacement battery would cost more than the residual value of the car). Further EVs are much heavier with power to match so any collisions will be more serious (there probably needs to be a review of road crash standards). Consequently insurance costs for EV's are significantly higher.

DEPRECIATION: with increasing 'flying hours' it is becoming clear that EV hype does not match reality. Unfortunately early adopters are finding that their very expensive purchases have very poor residual values.

RAW MATERIALS: current mining capacity is incapable of delivering enough raw materials to deliver 'GEN 1' of an EV fleet, never mind the massive upgrade to power generation and distribution infrastructure that would be required to make it work. World wide there is a moratorium on opening new mines. This is incompatible with 'we need more copper, lithium, cobalt, graphite etc for EV batteries'. Little or no thought seems to have been given to what will happen with the large pile of toxic 'GEN 1' batteries when they are thrown on the scrap heap.

THE CAR OWNS YOU AS MUCH AS YOU OWN IT: An EV typically comes with lots of 'smarts' and may well require that you interact with it though an 'App'. It will have lots of opinions about it's use. There are many reports of owners being locked in or locked out of their vehicles when 'computer says no'. Manual knobs may well be replaced with touch screen menus that are a distraction hazard. Manufacturers will log GPS records, internet activity etc.

Carbon footprint of an EV explained in 90 seconds https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1E8SQde5rk&t=510s @ 8:30 min -> 10:00.

I absolutely agree that AWE has huge potential. However at this point it is hard to say whether they will ultimately end up in the semiconductor industry 'Hall of Fame' or being footnoted as 'also rans'. I'm hoping for the former.

In my own case I became particularly interested after listening to their OUTSTANDING Capital Markets Day presentation of last year (Jan 13 2023).

https://www.lsegissuerservices.com/spark/ALPHAWAVEIPGROUP/events/7aadd13f-2514-47e1-8281-baced5bae5e8 (no real registration required)

Potentially the company stands to benefit from a number of industry trends.

1) First and foremost the 'data explosion' and the solutions that AWE can bring to the table. A.I. as the 'topic du jour' tends to be mentioned first but there is a raft of other drivers. With industry leading solutions in serDes, co packaged optics etc AWE could be expected to benefit from the challenges currently being encountered.

2) Chiplets. Physics wise we have run out of runway in terms of cramming more functionality into smaller and smaller areas. Tomorrows solutions are going to have to be assembled from sub assemblies, some of which will be 'off the shelf' (AWE could be expected to benefit from their IP portfolio) and others which will be new. The enabler will be new interface technologies (where again AWE are at the leading edge / contributing to standards).

3) RISC-V. Eventually I believe RISC-V will do for proprietary instruction sets what Linux did for proprietary operating systems. If I was the likes of ARM I wouldn't be be worried in the short term but I would be worried in the long term. RISC-V seems to be coming along in leaps and bounds driven by the ROW's need to neutralise US tech hegemony and the trend towards 'less in more' (I only need a chip that will do 'my' job not 'any' job. It is probably going to cheaper, consume less power etc).

So AWE in the happy place of not only being able to serve specific trends but uniquely in a position to deliver solutions that potentially would be greater than the sum of their parts. Further 'Data' and the industry that surrounds it (ie AWE's addressable market) is growing exponentially and is recession proof.

2023 had been pencilled in as a year for digestion and consolidation following the various acquisitions of 2022 (Precise-ITC, OpenFive, and Banias Lab). So it is understandable that market wise the company was standing still / treading water for 2023.

However I do think 2024 will be a 'land grab' year for those in the 'data shifting' and 'custom silicon' industries so I would like to see them come storming out of the traps in 2024.

I agree semi-interested that as a minimum AWE need to at least meet the guidance reiterated at the interim's.

"The outlook for 2023 remains unchanged. Alphawave Semi expects 2023 revenue of US$340m to US$360m and adjusted EBITDA of approximately US$87m (or approximately 25% of revenue), which is at the mid-point of the revenue guidance range"

Though I'm worried about the term 'adjusted'. At the interim's the 'adjusted' EBITDA was $32.4m but after it it was decimated by share and retention payments the reported EBITDA was $10.7m. Were such payments a one off or are they likely to continue to drag down the reported EBITDA? If so for how long ?

I am persuaded that AWE have the right tools and people at the right time. However the market remains to be persuaded that AWE can capitalise on the opportunity. The opportunity will pass them by if they cannot strike while the iron is hot.

Jangada has the same 'mail drop' address as various San Leon entities ??

i.e. 27/28 Eastcastle Street, London, England, W1W 8DH

I do like the fact that he is standing in front of a map of the world.

I do hope that is a coded message that AWE plan world domination.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-IDeBodOyE

Indeed I think OF has been pis5ing on everyone's shoes and telling them that it is raining.

Continuing to mix metaphors

Probably the "sky is clouding over with chickens coming home to roost"

I have since read the book. It was very well researched and very detailed. I enjoyed it.

I'd have said that it was full of insights for the AWE management team.

Hopefully the AWE story will ultimately have more in common with that of ARM than Canadian trail blazers Blackberry / Nortel.

Agree Moneyman64

Many companies are a 'jam tomorrow' story where the jam never appears. In Tharisa's case when jam does appear it is whipped off the table, rolled over into an all or nothing accumulator bet and replaced with post dated 'Jam I.O.U.'

On what PGM basket case was the KARO investment predicated ? I'd have thought it was verging towards unprofitable at current prices.

Hi Cindercone,

Is this the same Amazon that is responsible for immoral and profligate waste ?

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-lm&q=amazon+discard+scandal

Mainly my problem with EVs is the hypocrisy and the BARE FACED LIE that they reduce overall carbon emissions. This guy explains it well in 90 seconds @ 8:30 min -> 10:00

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1E8SQde5rk&t=510s

So I'm tired of people driving about EV's that are the size of a tank, that an average person cannot afford but who nonetheless contribute subsidies so that a deluded and privileged few can pat themselves on the back for 'saving the planet' (NOT).

I think the EV initiative will wither on the vine. There are too many issues with EVs

INCREASED CARBON EMISSIONS: over it's life time an EV with decent range (ie battery) will be responsible for MORE NOT LESS carbon emissions than an ICE. Considerably more 'stuff' needs to be mined, refined, processed and manufactured to create an EV. Moreover on the road there may be zero emissions but these have probably just been moved down the road to the nearest power station (unless it is a solar/wind farm etc - unlikely).

RANGE ANXIETY: used for short repeated journeys an EV would be a expensively useful second car option. The problems arise when touring / on long distance trips. Leaving aside that the infrastructure more or less doesn't exist, even where it does it is a highly unsatisfactory experience. It takes a long time to charge a battery. If someone gets to a station before you it will be an even longer wait. If there are multiple stations the available load is probably reduced and shared amongst the stations. To interact with the station you may well have to 'download an App' and register details with the service provider.

TYRES: EV batteries are extremely heavy (typically 300->400kg). Electric motors are more powerful than their ICE equivalents. Put the two things together an you have a vehicle that will chew through expensive tyres.

FIRE HAZARD EV batteries are a massive fire hazard. Considerable effort is taken to mitigate the risks but it is always there.

INSURANCE: Any damage that might compromise a battery will require an extremely expensive battery replacement. Minor shunts can turn into total write off’s (a replacement battery would cost more than the residual value of the car). Further EVs are much heavier with power to match so any collisions will be more serious (there probably needs to be a review of road crash standards). Consequently insurance costs for EV's are significantly higher.

DEPRECIATION: with increasing 'flying hours' it is becoming clear that EV hype does not match reality. Unfortunately early adopters are finding that their very expensive purchases have very poor residual values.

RAW MATERIALS: current mining capacity is incapable of delivering enough raw materials to deliver 'GEN 1' of an EV fleet, never mind the massive upgrade to power generation and distribution infrastructure that would be required to make it work. There pretty much is a moratorium on opening mines world wide. This is incompatible with 'we need more copper, lithium, cobalt, graphite etc for EV batteries'. Where mining does occur it tends to be in the last places where it should occur eg the DRC. Little or no thought seems to have been given to what will happen with the large pile of toxic 'GEN 1' batteries when they are thrown on the scrap heap.

THE CAR OWNS YOU AS MUCH AS YOU OWN IT: An EV typically comes with lots of 'smarts' and may well require that you interact with it though an 'App'. It will have lots of opinions about

Last year VANQ gave a Q4 update on Jan 26 (234.8p) ahead of their full results on March 31,

The message at that time was "The Group continued to trade in-line with management and current market expectations"

The incompetence / disconnect from reality was revealed when Malcom Le May and Neeraj Kapur singing each others praises jointly pressed the self destruct button on March 31st.

Lets hope VANQ is in safer hands ( famous last words - I believe it is ).

BTW MLM will FINALLY be paid off this month.

The book looks like an interesting read.

I believe we are expecting a "Q4 Trading Statement 2023" on Jan 23

"The Company intends to pursue all of these requirements following the conclusion of its refinancing."

- Don't hold your breath,

"Why does the production of accounts depend on the refinancing? "

- There is no dependency but it might be pointless if there is no refinancing.

Zzzzz .....

I'd have thought an RNS confirming receipt of funds should be in order.

i.e. one on Thursday or Friday.

Mike1959 - thank you for your informative and helpful observations!

On the face of it Tharisa seems to have a very depressed / derisory valuation.

If I look for reasons it seems that the most likely explanation is Karo ?

The company plan to make a MASSIVE upfront expenditure on the Zimbabwe project ($391m to FOIM - first ore in mill ! ) in the short term with the objective of recouping this and more in the long term. The final result could be anywhere between spectacularly good to spectacularly bad and anywhere in between.

If it is not KARO

- what other explanations are there ?

If it is KARO

- what is the payback period for Karo ie when Phoevos talks about 'patient capital' how 'patient' does it need to be ?

- did the company need to proceed in this one 'big gamble' way?

BMN had 1.2 odd billion shares on issue when it it was last at 10p ( https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/BMN/issue-of-equity-and-total-voting-rights-te7nflp21gya4e4.html ). A further 1.2 billion shares have been added since.

Therefore to regain the capitalisation that it previously had at 10p the SP would need to rise to 5p. 5p is the new 10p.

The company rarely has been able to declare a profit (bar in exceptional and exogenous circumstances ). For the foreseeable it is drowning in debt at punitive interest rates. Realistically it is going to be in the company equivalent of a medically induced coma for years to come - regardless of what happens in the unfathomable and unpredictable vanadium market.

Basically BMN is a pariah with the legend 'UNCLEAN' tattooed on it's forehead as far as the wider investment community is concerned. Anybody who thinks it might revisit past glories any time soon now that it has been rushed to intensive care and hooked up to life support is deluded.

Mr Fanning has managed to trouser circa $14m in remuneration selling hope / tomorrows jam in the last eight years while the company and its share price have flat lined. Gift of the blarney and all that.

I’m not convinced his personal ideal outcome is other than to be permanently in situ being paid to either pursue deals that never conclude or fight litigation.