Member Info for jaskk

This is not a good move by Rishi, as previously house builders had the advantage due to help to buy and stamp duty cuts over the secondary market. With this move, that has now disappeared, which means more competition. I suspect that this will be seen as an opportunity for a lot of buy to let investors to sell and indeed Rishi admitted he wanted to see transaction volumes up. If this results in more properties coming to the market, coupled with high unemployment / under employment, expect house prices to fall a lot further. Who cares about saving a couple of percent, when the homes could be with considerably less in a year or so ( especially in the capital ). Housebuilding is a cyclical business and its been well overdue a correction, which normally comes every 10 years or so. Maybe Im wrong, but no housebuilding directors have been making large purchases of shares and indeed recently have been massive sellers over the last couple of years just to underpin my point.

Government infrastructure fund is going to be set up, so there will not be the need for share dilution as companies that win tenders can tap into it and Kier will end up using the profits generated to pay down debt. There is going to be an awful lot of unemployed to choose from that will keep labour costs down and increase margins.

Shorting are we ? Lol

Extremely undervalued. Well run, preserving cash, waiting for certainty before paying dividends which is sensible, rent collections high.

Should be anytime now, but won't show anything concerning current situation as backward looking, they will however be updating on the dividend, but given the current share price, nothing is expected for this year and next. Made a good profit in the half year results which was reported as a loss due to a valuation mark down ( clever accounting ). I suspect that as they now have new accountants and with the current Covid situation results will take bit longer to produce. At current prices and giving a further discount of 30%, minus borrowings, then the land is worth more than than the current market cap. When you compare to Hammerson and British land, the price seems very cheap and can only assume it is a legacy of Woodfords involvement.

I think you've hit the nail on the head, I expect to dividend to be circa 80p this year, implying a fair value of circa £11.75 per share when compared to BAT, without taking into account debt etc

Hi deeplake77, hope your right, but my worry is that earnings per share still don't cover the dividend even at the reset level and I don't like it when they use ambigious words like ' implying ' which suggests that it isn't definite.

Why didn't they just cut to 65 - 75 % of earning per share and be done with it. The worst thing to do would be death by a thousand cuts. Sadly I suspect that this will be cut again when the new man takes over. Even if it had been cut to 80p for example, they could have drawn a line under it and moved forwards. My suspicion is that they are giving the new guy some room to kitchen sink the business when he starts

Agree. Earnings don’t even cover the rebased dividend. Doesn’t read well.

I couldn't buy back into this now until the second placing was guaranteed ( regardless of price ) and at a price to reflect the risk and lack of credibility the board of brought upon themselves. This maybe cheap based on assets, but could also be a zero with no funding and the games currently being played.

I would have been happier, if the all money had been committed at the placing price without conditions. This smells very much like, if we can sell the initial tranche at a profit we will take the second, if not w'ere off. If they were really committed they would have paid all the money and been happy with some conditions set that they can't sell the new acquired shares for x amount of years etc, confirming they were investors. This RNS smells of desperation.

Maybe, but why all the conditions on the second placing, why not just provide the money straight away ? Why won't banks lend the money ? Why have ANS decided against this ? Something doesn't feel right here anymore and its all very good saying directors haver bought share, when we all know they can easily make that money back by issuing more shares to themselves and selling them on. This is now about credibility. For all we know Gold mines could end up being nationalised worldwide, with the amount of QE going on by governments.

Someone seems desperate to stop the share price dropping to the placing price, so that someone can bail at a quick profit to their 0.65p placing price. Not de-ramping, just observing.

Just listened to the Tom Winnifrith podcast and it seems he offered him the chance of placing shares on Friday which he morally declined. Not a good way to treat investors.

They do when they can sell the shares at a profit by manipulating the news and bail before it fails. It would have been more credible if it had been a bank lending in the normal way. Don't forget hedge funds can make money shorting and now they have the shares to do so.

RAB may not be, but why such a discount to the share price if this was such a certainty ? Too many ambiguous words in that RNS. Also why the warrants ? All the conditions ?

When you think about it, wouldn't it be better for the government to see this fail, then nationalise the mine and keep the gold ?

Yes and no. It now means that the Ethiopian government is not financially backing this in the interim, hence the need for a placing and there is now the possibility this may not happen with all the conditions of the fund raise that need to be met.

I think its more a case of credibility and trust now. What happened to the Ethiopian government funding this in the interim ? Im not sure I can have shares in a company that is economical with what it says.

Why weren't existing shareholders given the chance to buy the new shares at 0.65p ? Yes they need to raise cash, but this stinks and there are too many unknowns now, contingent on this and that etc. Not happy