Member Info for Laverda

Re Suay Chin, no finance no offtake deal it should have read. Assuming finance is a condition of the offtake.
So many options is why we just have to wait and see, much better than a tough market and everything hanging on one option as junior miners often found themselves in.

Guido, no they don't, you can borrow with no deal, people are getting muddled on here, production loans are common.
We don't know what the conditions of the offtake are, most would expect finance to be a condition.
Therefore if Suay Chin cannot provide finance then likely no deal.
A mining company wanting to buy in would have to pay.
All different aspects getting muddled into one.

There is no hype on here.
For anyone that thinks that then they really need to take a hard look at themselves and their knowledge and think again.
This is simply a real company, an explorer getting on with business.
Businesses take time to progress they are real material entitites.
This company has 100s of square kilometres in gold and lithium just to walk it all would take months never mind develop it.
As an explorer the lithium is one stage off being fully derisked and that is the financing of the project. They have sort of added another stage as they want a dense media or in UK speak dense medium washer approved, they do not require this approval if they stick with their original option so the mine progresses either way. But changing to this detail is a formality.
Companies out there make their living financing mines, that is what they do, if you were going to finance a mine today which material mined is the least risky? Lithium I would say.
Not hype - knowledge and homework.
All AIM risks remain, but you have to be a complete numpty if you do not understand AIM risks and invest in that market. Anyone who posts on here about AIM risks is an arrogant idiot in my books.

Real talk lol. Finance deal, JV, buyout or go it alone. Potential explorer to junior miner, nothing special in that news!!!

Speel re the admin error I agree, I don't think that is possible accidentally. Maybe in preparation of something to stop a further delay, he is up for election at the next meeting.
Giving up at the lowest risk point after riding out all of the higher risk times is a strange decision.
I hope you don't regret it.

Elcobble, difficult to predict. Investors may be desperate for gains as there are many losses in the market.
They may surf the gains here by jumping in on solid news, alternatively there may be little money about and it doesn't move much until production and then larger share investors jump in.
Who knows, the media is scaring the life out of people.
As if inflation and mortgage rates above 5% have never occurred before - ludicrous. Education has never been so good, but intelligence never so low and commonsense left the room long ago.

Merc - guaranteed?
Nothing is guaranteed in the markets.
Definitely everything is aligning nicely.

Guido, there is an old business saying, turnover for vanity profit for sanity. They have maximised net profit. Shrewd business move.

Guido, it is more net profit, follow the figures which make up NPV.
Remember those figures are also in reality very low, unlike the other lithium shares they are not using values anywhere near current lithium prices.
One other prominent share is using 4k per tonne.

Guido, there is more profit by processing less material at a lower cost per tonne.
They also costed removing Spod 5.5% if you remember. And ditched that idea too. Nothing more than that. No issue no conspiracy. Why process twice as much material for less money?
Funding is everywhere for lithium, no question in my mind about the funding.

666 the figures look incorrect for a just under 3% drop. It is an automated system and normally corrects itself during the day or in the following morning.

Epic, but the institutional investor also weighs up the upside, a good company unable to communicate how good they are and with poor admin could impact on their return and could make an admin error which may cost money.
Institutional investors will not be investing when this company is so small, the holding would be insignificant. Once the revenue is close to coming in and a couple of goldfields some smaller funds may take interest.

Accion - cheers

100 not out, I blame the website for no new investors. In the lithium overview the emphasis and links are for old documents.
If you have never seen or heard of this company before and went there for an overview, you would think there was a longer way to go than there is.
The links go to old studies with old tonnages and old values none of which are used in the NPV.
The only way to get a clear picture is to read every RNS carefully from 2017 to the present day.
The presentations are no good either as they assume previous knowledge.

Cheers to you both, makes financing much easier and more competitive.

Bumping along, rarely if ever does a share price including relatively much lower risk investment trusts (also shares) reflect the underlying asset value. It is a fundamental feature of shares.
Kodal shares are no different.
There are many shares in AIM with a market capitalisation of 100m plus that in my opinion could not reach that net asset value in a decade, those prices are driven on sentiment.
At the current Kodal stage in this lithium market it is difficult to mess this one up.
What else is happening in the World in my opinion only, is our greater risk. Intelligence and diplomacy as in skilled diplomats no longer appear to exist in the western world.
The stock markets across the world as a result are at the moment a mess.

Cheers Dusty, maybe at last they will remove the 680 dollars per tonne figure (recent market price 5k per tonne) and replace the companies interested in off takes from 2017 to companies interested in buyouts and JVs, just to bring them up to date.
A new investor would pass and think it will be a few years before they are mining, not in the next 14 months.

Dusty onboard? As usual they have not updated their website, now the overview, tonnage mine life etc is all incorrect.
This is what lets this company down for potential investors.
A new investor has to read every RNS to understand where we are today.
Fortunately the geologist and running the company on the ground is so far spot on, just shame this is not reflected on the website.

Paper, a JV is selling part of the business, until it is signed if it happens, they do not have to send out an RNS.
A movement of an individual on the board from one role to another could be disguised if it broke a disclosure rule and could affect the market without anything being signed and agreed.
Otherwise it could be seen as misleading the market.

Cheers clapa. I used to write the agenda and finalise the minutes in a technical part of a large company. Someone in my department would check my agenda for a silly error, typo etc. Then the agenda would be released for everyone who attended the meeting in a professional and or voting capacity, a week before the meeting, if anything needed adding or removing (never needed anything removing) it would be done at this point, any other business picked up adding something but if it required a decision everyone would be informed so they could prep, for an admin error to remove someone to me seems impossible.
The only way that someone could be removed is if they were not elected correctly in the first place or if they were voted out by a formal process at a meeting. I don't understand their admin story regarding Steve, it may be early prepping for something without calling an extraordinary meeting which would alert everyone to something happening. Just my opinion if it is admin it is a big error by a number of people, not just a minor error.