Member Info for lootgaloot

So if this drilling campaign takes two to three months; it could be September before we get any news. While further drilling results are an essential requirement to proving the resource, recent history suggests that excellent drilling results don't seem to be enough to move this share price.

Let's face it, CCZ listed on AIM almost a year ago at 2.3p and today we are at 2.6p, despite drilling results that have far exceeded most peoples expectations! This share seems unloved and I'm beginning to wonder why?

So I guess we have to wait until September for more fantastic drill results (I hope) so that the share price inches up another 0.3p? And then it's on to Ayra for more of the same.

Does anyone have a view on why the market seems to doubt the potential of this company?

More detail on website https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/CCZ/02376342.pdf

Good trading update today; I bought 450 shares this morning and will add to this. This is the upturn I was expecting although I admit it's sooner than I thought. Not out of the woods yet but the direction of travel from here is upwards. £35 by year end would be nice.

I don’t think Zambia will have a material effect on the share price; up or down. The BOD have enough on their hands with Mt Oxide. I think they’ll keep Zambia ticking along with minimal investment; things would have to go very badly in Oz before Zambia becomes a focus.

I’m not sure why you have such a downer on Cangai. It’s a proven historical resource having produced 5,000 tonnes of copper (as well as gold and silver) with just a pick and shovel. The drilling tests by the previous owners were done in the wrong location and CCZ has reported excellent mineralisation from their drilling cores.

When CCZ listed in London they openly stated that they are looking for a partner to progress the Cangai resource. That was only last year; it’s a little soon to say they have f***** up. The plan hasn’t changed and there is no reason to suspect that they wont find a partner. It may not happen tomorrow but later this year? next year? Let’s wait and see.

I agree that there seems to be a lack of engineering/mining experience in the BOD. The environmental issues at Cangai were a learning experience and I am pleased that management are now looking for a more experienced partner. I suspect they will also look to partner with a more experienced miner if/when they have proven the Mt Oxide resource.

The focus for now, and what’s going to move the share price, are the drilling campaign and JORC for Mt Oxide. I hope the Big One is a big enough resource to be commercial and we will get our answer pretty soon. Any talk of Zambia or Cangai misses to point imo.

Very interesting video @viable. I'm glad I watched. It hasn't put me off CCZ but it's given me plenty to think about. I was thinking I may be a bit over exposed and the video was a timely reminder that CCZ is very speculative. I needed the reality check. Thanks.

Surprising rise based on a re-hash of already available updates. Also, market cap is not £26.5 million; CCZ is also quoted on ASX with a similar amount of shares listed so market cap is twice that quoted in the article. Hard to take HotStockRockets seriously with such fundamental error.

Fat cat bonuses and shareholder revolts. Also poor Q1 revenue. Yet share price rises today.

It's a bit harsh to say management should have already had access to the BHP report before now. Try going into your place of work tomorrow morning and search for a report that was written in 1997. I assume we have some millennials on this board who think everything is 'on the P: drive'. I'm old enough to remember when most large companies had dark basements with piles of documents buried beneath each other.

I recall some of the historical data on the Big One was found in a retired engineers home attic. That indicates to me a monumental effort to track down historical data. I know when I retire, if some stranger knocked on my door asking to see old work documents from almost 25 years ago they would receive pretty short shrift.

Well done to the management on the latest RNS. They are clearly going the extra mile even if it's not always appreciated by some shareholders.

Today's Berenberg downgrade has really taken the wind out of the sails of FOUR. Still a long term buy; but not yet.

Revenue has fallen off a cliff as you would expect (81% down compared to 2019) so really it’s a question of how quickly HSW can get back to business and does it have cash to see it through.

They had €18.2m cash in December but I’m a little concerned that the total admin costs for 2020 was €36.1m and this was after considerable belt tightening.

If Europe opens up in late summer then I’m not too concerned; however, there’s a real risk of this third wave making the summer a write off and then we’re into the next academic year when a lot of young people will be more keen on reuniting with university friends than on travelling.

The company has access to a €30 million term loan facility so I’m not suggesting that they cannot survive. At the same time, I’m not so keen to invest at this time. I’ll sit it out and see how this third wave of the virus plays out.

Nice to see some posts from people with knowledge of the industry. It's a quite board but that's not such a bad thing. From my perspective (chemical industry) I see very little signs that the conference season will pick up this year; more likely to be 2022. I'll hold my small number of shares and look to add later in the year.

Excellent article even if it made uncomfortable reading. I'm also disappointed that the BOD were selling shares earlier in the year when they would have known they were producing low grade ore. These may be teething issues but a lot of trust has been lost as far as I'm concerned.

Thought this was very interesting...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zhdM7hJwiw

Sell everything now!!! I used to be invested in a chewing gum company and I lost money.

Copper getting a hammering after London close. I think we'll trade between 2p and 2.5p for a while yet.

@triumph, you point out that interest rates are still lower than pre-covid and ask why I think interest rates will continue to rise. It’s a fair point; I’m making certain assumptions. However, I believe it’s justified to ask the ‘what if’ questions and I’m hardly alone in raising the topic. In fact, the article you linked to is evidence of the nervousness around the airline leasing business model. I'd go as far as saying it is now the consensus view that interest rates will rise significantly in the future.

AVAP’s position is particularly perilous; they not only carry high levels of debt but rely on debt to fund ongoing operations. Add in the fact that bondholders were recently forced to accept 65% of loan note value and AVAP credit status will be at junk levels when they need to raise further funds. That's not a recipe for success in a high interest rate world.

You said I could say the same for any company but this is simply not true. There are many companies with low levels of debt who fund their operations from cash flow. Even within the airline industry, many large carriers still have investment grade credit ratings. So it is not true that all airlines credit ratings are junk; you mention IAG and Easyjet – downgraded in 2020 but not junk.

The later part of your post is irrelevant. You revert to a ‘once things return to normal’ argument whereas I am asking the ‘what if’ question regarding interest rates. You are entitled to ignore my scenario but I’d say that’s very unwise. Everything you say in the latter part of your post falls apart if AVAP cannot raise funds at a competitive rate.

@Scoobydoo; it’s not really a case of picking my brains because I don’t know much about AVAP or the industry. However, what I do know is, to get nervous when people start to see things as a one way bet. 25 years of investing has taught me this is never the case.

AVAP has been on my watchlist for about 6 months for exactly the reason you state; ‘I see a simple equation for AVAP, if international travel back = AVAP is back.’ I have stocks on my watchlist for months (sometimes years) before buying. It gives me time to challenge my initial view of the stock and indeed to imagine scenarios that may never happen, but could.

Going back to my original post; my concern is with the business model of AVAP rather than with the specifics of current lending terms. Like you, I assume current borrowing is on ‘fixed’ terms that were sustainable before the lockdown and may even be sustainable IF business returns to pre-covid levels. But, as I have said, current borrowing is not my concern.

It’s the business model itself that looks shaky to me in a high interest rate environment. Of course AVAP are going to talk up their own business model in their presentation. I haven’t seen it and I’m not particularly interested in seeing it but I did have a laugh when you said that AVAP referred to the ‘burnt balance sheets’ of its customers. A phrase about throwing stones in glass houses springs to mind.

AVAP would like to present a scenario in which it continues to make sense for carriers to lease rather than buy. But let’s look at some facts; even in our current low interest rate environment only 4 out of every ten aircraft are leased. What type of carrier lease and which choose to buy? Ryanair lease only 33 of their 383 aircraft while over 70% of LOT and Wizz Air fleet are leased. Generally speaking, small, start-up airlines are much more likely to lease. Established firms with good credit histories will buy.

Now, your guess is as good as mine. If you believe we are about to enter a golden age for small carriers with poor credit ratings looking to expand their routes then maybe AVAP are a good bet. However, if you believe we are entering a period of consolidation where the big players snap up the airport slots of struggling regional carriers then I’d suggest you steer clear of AVAP.

Even if, as you suggest, AVAP can pass on their borrowing costs to these small regional carriers; this only shifts the burden onto the very customers that AVAP depend on. Higher interest rates mean higher costs for that part of the market and shifting the cost from leasor to leasee isn’t going to help. The big boys will also be affected by higher interest rates but they will survive and even grow. They may have to extend the service life of their aircraft by a few years and with a bit of inflation their fleet may actually increase in value.

I can’t predict the future of this industry any more than the next person. I can simply state the reasons why AVAP are no longer on my

At it's heart this company is essentially a buy-to-let operation. It borrows money to buy aircraft which are then leased out. For this reason, I don't think it's as simple as saying everything is OK once we return to international travel. The fortunes of this company will depend a lot on the future interest rate environment. Bond yields in US are rising fast and that will increase interest rates globally. Can AVAP generate enough cash to pay interest on loans going forward. At what point does it make more sense for carriers to invest in their own fleet. Just like buy-to-let housing, the business model only makes sense in a low interest rate environment.

I'd give it a few days to figure out the reason for an almost 6% drop.

Just because these brands use itaconic acid it doesn't necessarily mean that ITX are the source. There are several global manufacturers of itaconic acid on the market. Unless someone can prove that the items on this ever growing list actually source from ITX then I'd have to say these posts are highly misleading.