Member Info for johnpwh

Hi jdt
Just a short one as I have to go out.
I meant that the option money would have prevented the necessity of a placing(s) to satisfy the equity part of debt financing. I was unaware that the loan to NC was to be netted against the option proceeds as you state?
25% of a big deposit is still a big deposit, and a bit like a bird in the hand being worth 2 in the bush I might have been happier with the certainty of an exercised option rather than the chaos that has ensued following the announcement of 19th. That is just an opinion and don't ask or expect anyone else to agree.
Thanks for the reply it was polite and appreciated

Bellers
He is investing after the news of the event is in the open. Yes, he knew it was coming and ironically he probably would not have been allowed to invest at a higher price in the days leading up to the this announcement as he knew something unannounced that was likely to cause a change in SP! But in fairness no matter when he invested, how long after the event could it be said he didn't profit from knowing about a placing at 15% below the most recent applicable SP? Its a hard one to answer, he will have stuck to precedents

Thank you jim for an interesting and thought provoking post

Agree JohnBull
I am beginning to suspect that we would have been far better off with 60 million from the 5% option being taken up. This is dilution pure and simple, with the inevitable prospect of a further dilution from a 40 million placing from Tribeca to come. Does anyone believe that if the 5% had been exercised we would be currently have the SP we are likely to see tomorrow? The placing is priced at a SP nearly 30% less than the SP 5 days ago.
So with that statement lets see what free speech is allowed on this board by its 'owners'

Hi Stranger
What about consideration of access to Salinbas, by which I mean access to the site by significant roads, access to power, water, labour etc.?
Salinbas has been touted as the super pit since I first came here in about 2016. Others have been here longer so can correct me if wrong. In that time we seem to be not a day nearer to production, and worse we have lost 75% of the asset which of course means that AAU have no control anymore and a fraction of the potential income.
From memory I think Ozaltins liability for the FS is not open ended, it is limited to $8m which I assume due to inflation could come back to bite.
And as you say in your last paragraph, AAU has no control over any Turkish projects with the exception of Project Leopard. Why? Because 3 years ago they did a deal that lost them control. Now we have to do what masters Ozaltin say

samval
With the SP down over 17% over the past 5 days you and I will have to agree to disagree on this one!

No statement needed by SD? Lets have a look at the SP this morning. O dear. There is a need for an immediate statement unless you want the placing, when it comes as part of a finance package, to be at significantly less than 10p with all the dilution that implies

I agree. Discussions have been done to death. What we need is a proactive (or other) interview with SD about funding. That is the elephant in the room now, with lack of clarity affecting the SP detrimentally.

We feel the same way Foz, I've never known such a black hole of a company. I've known companies that make successions of bad decisions, gone up blind alleys, cooked accounts, suffered various types of misfortune etc etc. But one that had an MC well in excess of £50m in the last year (no longer of course, 50% of that) that just sits there inert, funding its Boards lifestyles periodically by successions of placings at ever decreasing SPs.....well you get my drift. I am convinced that this BoD is doing nothing but wait for a bid for some big player to take over the asset, on the assumption that a viable asset really exists, or alternatively for the EU to throw their endless money into developing local lithium deposits. If not in 5 years we will still be sitting around waiting while the majority of cars going past our front doors are EVs from EU based companies - well, unless us Pis have been wiped out by then which is probably more likely. All we can do is sell or stay and vote against the re-appointment of any of the directors as come up for re-election.

That is odd Foz. VW is of course the same as Audi/ Seat/ Skoda (and some low production stuff) but also in Germany we have Merc and BMW/ Mini. Surely..... Shall we write to them and ask them to take Zinnwald over? After all in a green economy isn't it greener to sort your lithium from a few miles down the road? What do they know about this moribund company or are they expecting to buy it from the liquidators after the tea & biscuits are all used up and the Board give up?

Thanks for the kind words DJ, though in fairness you could have said 'john is not grumpy at all'!
Hope you are keeping well

This certainly looks worse and worse

Hi Magnum
Good post. I think there is far too much speculation about NC and why what has happened has happened. Every theory cannot be right! It is easy to paint SB as the archetypal black cloaked Victorian villain. The truth is probably much more prosaic. What we do need, and I think we all agree, is a positive update from SD putting to rest concerns about funding - not necessarily a definite arrangement but reassurance to allay fears

Investors Chronicle, a magazine published I think by the Financial Times people

It is the funding issue that is the primary concern here, though a current (hopefully temporary) wobble in PoG isn't helping. Think that most accept that retaining the 5% is worth far more than 60m /85m in the longer term, but it is the short term that is weighing heavily, despite evidence that SD is on top of funding and would never have offered the 85m if that were not the case.
Hopefully SD can come up with some steadying statement about financing in the near future, and maybe yet more encouraging drill results would help. Maybe SD could invest also himself though in that respect he has the right to choose that timing to best serve himself, same as us

Agree with you daveri007. A low share price is terrible news if a placing or rights issue is likely as it translates to excessive dilution

bankrupty
My precis is that the value of the GGP holding cannot realistically be extrapolated from the 60m or 85m which is associated with the the 5% option. These were based on a formulaic calculation based on an outdated resource estimate which formed part of the JV agreement. Why was the 60m for 5% not taken up? We don't know, no one outside NC does, and discussion on the reasons why are definitely in recent posts. The reasons could be far and wide, NC demonstrating not coming over as the hard man when it relies on future JVs, difficulty in justifying to their shareholders paying 60m for 5% when they paid little more for 70%, from trying to put financial pressure on GGP, to wider issues within NC which, maybe unlike GGP, have many irons in the fire globally.

bankrupty
With respect, and I do mean that as I try not to be sharp with people on these boards, this has been discussed in hundreds of posts since Thursday. I suggest your answers are amongst those posts as I doubt there is much appetite to revisit

Please someone, make an offer for this zombie company over and develop the asset. Honestly, most of us will say yes.

I would genuinely like to thank contributors here over the last few days. I've finally caught up! We know what happened with the SP after the option price announcement in late July, a dip then strong recovery surpassing the immediately preceding level. The SP this week will be 'interesting' now people have had the weekend to reflect. I hope that a positive spin will now be put upon the news.