Member Info for JMUK26

If you are UK based and planning on holding these for the long term, I strongly advise you contact LCM to give feedback on the dividend. If no noise if made, then it will likely continue as it which is no good to anyone but the directors.

I have just contacted them to say I think it was a poor allocation of capital, given it is a UK listed company and paying out to largely UK based shareholders. To lose 30% at source to the Australian tax man (and potentially again to the UK tax man) means we effectively lose a proportion of our shareholding each year. If LCM apply a progressive dividend policy, this capital erosion will be much greater when compounded over time. Much more aggressive share buy-backs, debt reduction, or further case investment would all appear to be much better use of capital than the current poorly considered approach, unless they can find a work-around on the dividend.

Certainly pretty poor to lose 30% of the dividend when this is listed in the uk. They need to scrap the dividend and stick to share buy backs as this is not looking after the shareholders at all. They either don’t care or it’s been poorly thought out.

Would be helpful if they explained why he has left with immediate effect. What a thoroughly unhelpful RNS. Looks like they are hiding something.

PAT might need to cut all costs, mothball or sell any assets and sit tight until the case is complete (and hope for a successful outcome) unless they can raise some money at decent rates which is unlikely in this climate. The litigation funding is completely separate and is of no use to PAT from a cashflow perspective. Prairie mining were in a similar situation and were effectively operating as a shell for a few years until the exuberance of covid allowed them to do a meaningful fund raise to start exploration activities again.

There is news that Israel will breach international law by ordering Palestinians to evacuate. This sp is being run down on risk of trade embargo with Israel which is probably unlikely given uk and us bias. It certainly will not be over next week though.

Had my eye on this for a while waiting for an entry point but given what is going on in Israel I suspect this one has further to fall yet. BATM have come out with a very vague RNS stating that the war will have no material impact on business. How they can say that so early on is beyond me, MTI have been quieter which is probably more sensible until they have a better idea. There may be no real effect but I suspect the market may take this down to the 20's on uncertainty.

Maybe a sell that day and might not have even been a particularly big one, because liquidity is tight, it can swing sharply up and down on little volume. Overall this SP hasn't seen the drops that most of my other AIM companies have seen. I assume this is because the shares are tightly held and a recession or high interest/inflation environment should not affect this company like it will many others, as people will continue to get injured through negligence and demand for these services will not fall, if anything demand could rise as budgets are cut which leads to more staffing pressures and ultimately more mistakes.

Whilst no-one knows whether PAT will ultimately be successful in their arbitration claim, what we do know is that if they are successful, investors will be due a whole lot more than 5.8p! Ignore the price swings its largely irrelevant. What matters is the court case and the price will ultimately track that.

Agree, with a lot of other companies I'd have been thinking here we go, directors lying about future prospects to save face and deal with the profit warning when it comes. With these there is a good element of trust and what they say is what they mean. He thought that problems had been resolved and things were back on track to meet targets and it looks like that is exactly what is happening.

WorldwideT/Sweetunicorn brings up some valid points in his posts, but the relentless nature of the negative posts does little to reinforce his argument. He just repeats the same thing over and over in an attempt to de-ramp. Previously he was incessantly positive about SDI and continually ramped the shares. Since he went negative on SDI, very little has changed in the business, so either he got it wrong, or he's playing games. I wouldn't take too much notice personally.

As Chelsea says, many of the high valued small caps have come crashing down in the last year. Some of the quality expensive stocks on my watchlist are in a similar position to SDI, having come down from a peak of around PER2 of 20+ to around 10-11 today. I think a pay down on the debt and some director buys would help things immensely here. I'd prefer them to hold off any further acquisitions until they can get the debt down and reduce interest payments.

So you are saying Panthera Vs India will likely be heard and awarded quicker than Prairie V Poland? I'm not aware of any timescale being different based on where the claim is heard when it's being heard under ICSID framework. Can you explain further? If anything I would expect this case to take longer than average given it is India and their form with previous cases.

And yes, Prairie v Poland was heard under Covid which will inevitably have caused some delays, but providing we get a verdict in that case in Q1 next year it will be pretty much bang on average from registration to award in terms of timescale. Every case is different, so we can only go by what previous cases and use them as a guideline really. Nobody knows how long this will take to pan out.

Thanks for clarifying. Prairie mining hasn't followed those timescales - still waiting a year on from the hearing concluded. The average wait is well beyond 180 days normally so make of that what you will.

Don't know when PAT may register the arbitration, but you'd hope within the next 6 months.

Research similar international arbitration cases and you'll see that's that about the average, suspect it may have gone up a little if anything because of covid backlog which is only just easing up. The link ShearClass recently posted - and there are a few other similar documents - is a helpful snippet collating data from early 2000's to around 2010 from memory and gives you a good idea of how long things take. We have to remember the value of these cases, so it's not going to be rushed and no stones left unturned. Not sure where 180 days has come from, but no case will be registered, heard and awarded in 180 days.

Hi gls44, a very helpful poster on ADVFN does a semi-regular post summarizing LCM cases that have been heard and the outcome. From memory it was 3 unsuccessful claims over the last year, but well outweighed by successful ones.

Nice to have a few messages highlighting the behavior of a few members of this board is a little cliquey to say the least and newcomers are blasted down if they don't buy into the dreamland thoughts of the most active posters. All it does is make people not want to participate so you can all just sit in your echo chamber telling each other what you want to hear. That doesn't make it true unfortunately.

My posts weren't intended to annoy anyone and I didn't feel they were negative or in any way trying to de-ramp the shares. I actually bought my first lot yesterday so that would not be in my interest. Besides, do they really think a few posts on a forum are going to swing the share price - it's laughable really and the accusation of a green investor you often see on these small exploration company boards.

Don't know who Stampee1 is or where he is getting his info from, but again he's being way too optimistic with timescales, having just said he knows the risk and how long he will be waiting. 6months to 2 hears worst case?! Come on, it's really misleading!

The average international arbitration case takes 3.2 years on average from date of request to final award. The longest took 10.5 years and the shortest 1.2 years.

It takes on average 83 days just to register a request for arbitration, so those hoping for an RNS today are well off the mark.

The hearing itself will likely take around 2-3 weeks and it is usually another 1.2 years after that for an award to be announced.

My guess is that if goes the whole way and PAT are successful we'd be looking at year 2027 most likely.

If you aren't prepared to put these in the bottom drawer for 5 years you're probably in the wrong share. Of course there is the chance of an out of court settlement but this won't likely happen until nearer the time the hearing is due which won't be anytime soon.

Deckchair, bizzimartin, Alans55, shearclass & mickey feel free to ignore this post or filter me, but others may find it useful as a guide to the realistic wait ahead.

Happy Friday all.

I've not repeated anything, just correcting incorrect and overly optimistic timescales that are being thrown around from people who don't know what they are talking about and are likely to influence other less knowledgeable investors reading the board. And de-ramping...please lol how old are you! You lot are a fairly unwelcoming and deluded bunch so I'll leave you to your echo chamber and won't bother sharing useful info you guys might not be able to access. What else was I expecting from a board full of mining exploration gamblers with no patience. We'll still be waiting on a judgement 3 years from now and I suspect you guys will be long gone when I check back in. Happy gambling...

Guys this is a very hostile welcome to the board - so unnecessarily aggressive. It seems you all want a super fast verdict and anyone that suggests that it may not be as quick as you hoped is shot down and treated as a de-ramper or uninformed. I don't understand it.

1.2 years after the hearing is the average before an award is made based on a typical basket of around 100 cases. This is international arbitration statistics, it's not an opinion and I'm not going to get into an argument about it. If you are truly well informed you know where to find this info and by arguing with me just shows you don't know what you are talking about. You cant base your understanding of how long it will take on a single case you are aware of. There are of course outliers, some take up to 2.5 years, and even 5 years, some are quicker as in the case you highlight. Chill out and listen to other peoples opinions without getting all heated.

Alan - I'm invested here, so certainly not subtly de-ramping if that's aimed at me.

Mickey - The average is around 1.2 years after hearing complete but it could be much longer. Unlikely to be less than a year though but we can hope.

Deckchair - I know the Prairie mining v Poland case pretty well. Cheers.

Im sure you are probably aware but the grx process has not yet completed. The hearing has taken place and from that point it is typically another 1.5 years plus to get the verdict and any award that comes with that.

Doesn't everyone turn up out of nowhere when posting for the first time on a board :) I wasn't playing the expert on PAT, I didn't even mention PAT tbh I was purely talking about the legal process.

Didn't mean to get any backs up, was just trying to highlight this won't likely be a quick return and it will not be 100mph as some suggest. I'm sure there there are many well informed posters here that are aware of this, but the first few posts I read were a little naïve to the process that is to come that's all so was trying to make them aware, apologies if they are the minority here. I have made an initial small purchase and will likely top up in the coming months as I suspect the SP will gyrate fairly wildly giving opportunities. Good luck all.