Member Info for johnpwh

More than 50% if you look at the indirect holding via BCN shares. I doubt Mexico wants to confront China over this. With my rose tinted specs on it may prove long term to be good news -- Sonara wont be the only deposit in Mexico, and development of competitors by the State rarely turns out well

Hi Hintza, was about to ask if you are a deramper, but I don't think you are but just doing your due diligence.
The company can't realistically make a definitive statement that the report of nationalisation doesn't apply to BCN because ultimately it is the Mexican Government making it. The next Government there could be far left, far left or on the middle ground, no company can control a Government wherever in the world - the signs were that the UK could end up with a socialist government less than 18 months ago! That is why I have a golden rule about investment about avoiding the lesser developed African countries - political risk . I do feel relatively comfortable here though

Thanks bidnolid. I didn't think I was going mad!!

I think that EMH is a partnership, not Nationalisation. Although it has produced some consternation here I think we have a major advantage in that the Sonara project is directly/ indirectly owned more than 60% by a major Chinese company. China is Mexicos 2nd largest trading partner. And, if you don't mind me being crude, how much will the Maxicans want to p**s off the Chinese?

This keeps surfacing but there has been statements that this applies to future licences not those already granted.

I do take your point Foz, but by newsflow I wasn't restricting to company RNS'. We have the article about EURO7 emissions effectively outlawing ICE new car sales from the EU from 2025, Jaguars announcement, Fords, and a Democratic White House . We have apparently continued commodity price growth on the back of this. Anyway, like you a LTH looking for a gentle drift upwards with relatively little risk.....just seems the drift is firmly in the wrong direction at present

This is getting properly trying now! SP off 40% from its peak while newsflow remains positive and Lithium apparently rising. Unless 68p was overvaluing the company then even allowing for the dilution (which in my view was expected by the market
and inevitable) its hard to see why we are here.

I'm assuming that there will be a distribution to AAU from the JV from accounts drawn up to the date on which the new structure commences. That should add significantly to the coffers. If it doesn't happen the shareholders will want to know why

I'm not selling, if I did the following day would be a 50% rise! Lithium prices appear to be rising on a daily basis with plenty of headroom before threatening previous highs. The motor industry as well as Governments are announcing the death of ICE cars much earlier than predicted only a few years ago. My only concern is that BCN sticks to Schedule, something they don't have a great reputation of achieving amongst posters

Hi Dave, this is something I know nothing about. Can you precis briefly why it would go to auction and what it means?
Thanks

Think 'only upwards' is likely to be wide of the mark but I know what you mean!

Hi Van. Sadly despite the best efforts of Dr S the PR message is just not getting through. Just what does that PR company do for their (our) money? Answers on a postcard.
Despite never being a fan of the expanded JV, I do think AAU to be undervalued now.

Hopefully there is a clear sign that the hangover from the placing is now at an end

Totally with you 'r'. Unless something goes wrong with the Lithium commodity price, which seems very unlikely with a Democratic White House and EV advert s everywhere you look, this seems almost a low risk investment now.
Maybe a bit of the multibagging potential has been traded for lower risk but I'm fine with that.

broker
I was going to say, don't shoot me I'm just the messenger - have only posted the once on the subject and that was intended to be factual and helpful!
Have a good weekend

I may have missed a few (or a lot) of posts here but on the face of it the stamp duty problem is due to being listed on TSX Venture (or TSXV) in addition to AIM, due to the following:
'The exemption will not be available in relation to securities which are also listed on a “recognised stock exchange”, a list of which is maintained by HMRC and includes many overseas stock exchanges such as the TSX and TSXV (Tiers 1 & 2). It is likely that most overseas companies on AIM will not benefit from this new exemption if they are dual listed.'
HOWEVER
There was an announcement via RNS on 7th January 2019 (available in the RNS tab above) stating that the TSXV listing was being lapsed as the vast majority of transactions took place on AIM. Its hard to believe that the company has overlooked the need to apply for exemption after 2 years but I do agree with the previous poster who suggested someone contacts Rambler. While only 1/2% it's still unnecessary expenditure for investors

Hi bluegrass
Are we arguing? Sorry my friend I'm obviously giving totally the wrong impression. Please accept my apologies.
John

bluegrass
I'm not too worried about the additional shares to take Ganfeng to 28.8%, although in theory the Chinese authorities can overturn the idea - in practice I don't think the market thinks that this will happen so the market price already assumes its a done deal. Another good point, made by a poster earlier, is that Ganfeng wont be trading these shares, so there wont be selling pressure from them.
I cant see the link anymore to the VSA Capital presentation (lse removed it?) which is I think available on their twitter account. They reiterated how important the fact that finance was fully in place is, and mentioned that other companies have failed through their inability to raise sufficient cash to develop their assets. We really should be pleased at what has happened, and if some aren't then maybe this isn't the company for them. Provided Lithium remains strong I think this company can provide shareholders with significant capital gains and eventual dividends with, now, relatively limited risk.

I don't think they had much option bluegrass. Since the Chinese permission isn't certain then the placing had to cover the required construction costs without it. Unfortunately the pre-emptive rights to Ganfeng had already been granted , so inevitably this was going to happen. Its done now, lets look forwards

My feelings too bluegrass. Think we'd all prefer that provided another placing doesnt come further down the line - that would be very bad for sentiment let alone confidence in BCN management