Member Info for iWantThatOne

Very positive RNS on all fronts. Only black spot is need for further funding, but we all knew that already I guess.

How can HUM management say how net profits should be utilized right now when there are still so many unknown potential commitments in the very near future, ie Sanankoro (Cora) and Dugbe as well as share buy-backs, divis, further Yanfolila extension etc.? I can well understand Dan’s comment that he’d like to get a full year’s production under his belt first. Yes, the poor SP performance in the meantime carries risks but there’s logic in his approach.

I suspect that, at the time, one year longevity compared reasonably to the cost of other renewables. In the last few years there’s been quite a lot of commentary on how solar and wind power has got a lot cheaper. I hope to God that when we reach 4 years the benchmark hasn’t moved on again!

With unknown future investment requirements at CORA, possibly Dugbe (to get a JV away) and even new high-return investments, it’s too early for divis or buy-backs - IMHO. Give it six months. An announcement that they are seeking the disposal of Dugbe, with proceeds returned to shareholders as a special divi, might be an alternative approach.

I suppose the Southern Oil RNS (assuming a successful outcome) could also include details of a) the mass manufacturing agreement with De Nora and b) a license agreement with Southetn themselves to use their innovative hydrogen process. The latter would also fit with Bond’s comments that there is a growing pipeline of commercial opportunities “in country” (Australia). Now that RNS would give the SP a right old boost.

The immediate prize here is a good chunk of the $4bn migrations. Progressive Equity Research is clearly anticipating some of that in its projected 2019 EUS of £1404m (a significant increase over their 2018 estimate of £540m). That gives earnings of 2.8p per share and a PE ratio of 58. However add another $1bn of migrations at say 0.5% margin, almost all straight to the bottom line, and you're looking at a PE ratio of less than 20.

The additional throughput, courtesy of the second ball-mill, should increase the NPV of the project simply by bringing forward the cashflows as the current reserves are processed more quickly. The likely extension of the LOM in addition should also increase the NPV nicely - all told, an extra 25% by year-end, perhaps?

I was initially surprised by what appeared to be a significant reduction in margins, but then read that a fee renegotiation with a major MNO had reduced payment revenue by £0.5m in the HY with the promise of greater data revenues later. If that hadn’t been done then the whole business would be tantalizingly close to being cash positive. I also noted the strong comment about switching the historic $4bn of EUS onto the platform - described as a “pipeline” and making good progress. All round, solid results and heading in the right direction.

SP at lowest level.....ever? Agree the lack of news of any kind is not proving to be a very helpful approach - it might be belt & braces as far as compliance is concerned but it's stifling investment at the very least. I was just about to do a top-up but came to a screeching halt when I saw the drop. Come on Mr Rennocks, loosen the policy a little and give us something. Am nervously awaiting an RNS tomorrow now, this won''t help my sleeping pattern at all.

Afraid I rarely look at the board now as there is no news. Apologies if I’ve missed it but what’s the thinking on Prizmacap (or lack of....)? Supposed to be ready by end-Q1.....

And GAN’s shatre of that $150m revenue would be.....? Any views?

58% of 2017 revenues were derived from Scandinavia and “other European countries”, so that’s the max % that can be affected by GDPR. So not as though it affects 100% of the company’s business.

5.75 years or so. Longer if they have time off for bank holidays and to go to the toilet.

The HY results will point the way forwards - not long to wait now. If results are in line with previous guidance, and so is projected H2, this this share is hugely undervalued. I suspect money (ad is mine) is waiting on the sidelines until then.

He may not have stated it, Andrew, but it seems a fair inference, don’t you think? Why would FB HR be dealt with on a substantially different basis than non-FB HR? Of course there may be all sorts of reasons for some differences but surely not down to 80/20. The main reason for that split seemed to be thst the Chinese partner would have to build a plant, the cost of which would have to be allowed for in the split.

As I understand it, the main purpose of the New Deferred Shares is simply to keep the nominal value of the capital unchanged. Since they have no value, they shouldn’t affect the value of the New Ordinary Shares (the ones which will be traded), which should simply be worth 377x more than the current ones.

I also thought “off grid drinking water generation solutions” sounded subtly different from water treatment (of non-potable water that is present in remote areas). But I may be reading too much into the wording!

The interims refers to a “water technology company” as opposed to a “water treatment company”. Due to the subtly different wording I was led to think that this is not De Nora.

Delighted at the thought that FB could be put through Omnia's plant - I could never understand why the other HR is going through them at 50/50 but we were looking to JV FB at a much lower percentage with some Chinese partner. Anyway, if we could get 50% of FB with Omnia then that'd be NPV c$42m each, assuming no capital spend required by either party.

It’s RA’s advisers who may have a view on his (ex-Chelsea) UK assets rather than the man himself, now that he’s no longer UK resident. Probably not an issue but you never know.