Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video here.
That’s an interesting perspective Zebra.
If you’re correct and the offer is aimed at the US market that’s a clever way of keeping everyone happy whilst supporting share price, removing shares from the register and saving on future dividends.
Easyinvester - congratulations, the most stupid post I’ve seen since GG left!
The dual listing was an attempt to increase availability of us funding (for future acquisitions and expansion). The consolidation was a pre requisite of this.
The slide in share price was in parallel but not due to US listing. I’d add a general ESG aversion in the UK and some specific negative journalism on methane emissions to Mr Gs post.
How can there be no intrinsic value in the company when they have declared assets and ongoing hedged production?
Lots of shares held by BoD (over 3% by Rusty) so I think their interests are pretty well aligned with ours.
Guess we should expect a mix of opinions - but yours are factually incorrect and a bit irrational.
Still, tender offer a good way out for you if you really think what you type.
Sorry - that should have read operating in KRG (not Iraq).
Mobiles and no glasses always a recipe for disaster 😲
The less aware amounts you may have missed the fact that KRG has spent years trying to be independent from Iraq (politically and financially).
Iraq has also deemed all oil companies active in Iraq to be operating illegally.
No way Iraq is going to pay KRG’s fines.
Go read any political news from the region over last decade.
Doesn’t matter whether it’s an out of court settlement or a in court settlement if the defendant can’t pay.
I’d say Genel’s case is a dead cert. However getting payment will be nigh on impossible. KRG haven’t had any income since pipeline closed. Can’t see Baghdad bailing then out!
Money is in Turks buying more, then opening the pipeline up - the arbitration is a sideshow.
They’ve got a messily £3m, many many months after it was promised and a JV ( with no funding).
Compare promises with reality - stark difference.
vls shares cancelled and company taken private with shareholders getting 0.25p for their shares.
lots of comparisons with eqt:
- inability to get their promising tech proven at industrial scales.
- treated more like a science project than a business.
- inability to raise funds commercially, successive raises diluted holdings enormously.
- late consolidation didn’t help.
i bought 3 lots of green aim shares (eqt, vls and getech) about 3 years ago with oil and gas dividends hoping one would make it. now one has failed and eqt and getech both in intensive care - meanwhile shell and bp continue throwing off cash. esg investing my ****!
SD - don’t start clogging up this board with logical, fact / numbers based arguments; most patrons here seem to prefer personal insults, conspiracy theories and random speculation.
Facts will not be entertained!
SD - well for something meant as "not serious" it wasn't very funny, ironic, witty or entertaining!
Guess readers can now just assume anything you say isn't serious (which begs the question why bother).
The fall in price is far more than "just another chance to buy in cheap." I'm a believer in the strategy and am seriously overweight in both SIPP and ISA as all the evidence I can see points to a patient hold being rewarded in the interim with a decent dividend and in the longer term with a SP back to a level where the current return to investors gets back to a more normal looking 10-12%.
However, the fall and continued lag show that the market doesn't like the story at present (many potential reasons have been discussed on here so I won't repeat but varying from credible (debt levels and confusing financials) to the bizarre (from GG).
Views in risk / reward will vary dependent on your interpretation of the info out there but it certainly is not a definite buy -big time at present in my opinion.
SD - the fall in share price does not reflect the accuracy or completeness of the answer but a wider issue of more sellers than buyers today for a whole raft of reasons.
Indeed, many of the sells were prior to 1200 when the RNS was issued.
The effectiveness of the DEC letter won’t be fully understood until if / when the Committee tell us whether they’re satisfied or not.
Coolbeans - not necessarily confusing just impossible to fully explain a deal of this complexity in a simple 3 para RNS.
There are 2 parts to the RCF; the upper limit (max overdraft in effect) and amount actually in use. The 305 figure is the max available now the assets / production used as a guarantee have reduced - this is not necessarily the amount DEC have drawn down - though I guess it would be close.
Oak Bloke has done a fuller explanation but based on June 23 reported financials so a little out of date but gives a good idea of the various components of the deal and their value.
Timing is a little unfortunate as the impact of this deal on accounts / debt might be as of 2 Jan and thus miss being included in the Dec 2023 EOY Financial reporting which I was hoping would show potential investors stable finances, the positive impact of hedging / derivatives and debt reduction ahead of plan .
Bigger question is why have they disposed of producing assets?
- think long term prices are downwards?
- reduce AOR costs?
- think reducing debt may help SP?
- realisation that operating other ventures' wells might be as profitable as selling gas?
- consolidate business and free up more cash for BBs?
RNS bland quote that it is to "unlock additional value..at an attractive multiple whilst enhancing liquidity and reducing leverage" covers a number of possibilities.
Notrex you seriously are a muppet!
I said they couldn’t afford them at the time without borrowing - cos they couldn’t.
Now 2 months later they can.
Which bit of cashflow do you struggle with?
I thought GG was wrong about everything - but he’s right about your mental ability.
Some more words added to increase the chance of Notrex understanding simple debt / cashflow.
Simple question for a simple poster. (Notrex)
Are share BBs better today at this price done with cash in hand or months ago (when you were proposing it) when SP was 20% higher and they’d have had to borrow the money?
Jim has gone very quiet because it’s not worth replying to you.
I told you months ago I didn’t think DEC should borrow for BBs and at the time their cashflow wouldn’t allow it. Now they have improved cashflow and SP has dropped so they can up the BBs without impacting debt repayment and incurring additional interest.
Simple question for a simple poster.
Are share BBs today at this price with cash in hand or months ago when you were proposing it when SP was 20% higher and they’d have had to borrow the money.
If you can’t understand that just stick to playing with GreyGeorge.