focusIR May 2024 Investor Webinar: Blue Whale, Kavango, Taseko Mines & CQS Natural Resources. Catch up with the webinar here.
Evening FastFood and all.
I think I may have indirectly highlighted this the other day. There is an omission on the significant shareholders list.
Alan Miller purchased 14,858,844 shares crossing the 4% threshold in one foul swoop. He entered at 4.73%. It was RNS'd on the 28th September, so way before Martin Lang started jumping in.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/CIZ/holdings-in-company-bmsyc3zwkfhnvc4.html
Lang's first buy was declared on 24th Jan 26,109,570 shares (7.52% ), he then added 6th Feb and went to 8.02% (27,831,651 shares), and finally topped it off at 9.03% on the 22nd Feb (31,333,857 shares).
Lang's holding is showing correctly on the latest data, but Miller is absent. By rights he should sit between Dr Dawn 5.02% (17,048,137) and Interactive Services Nominees Ltd (3.67%) 12,499,404
https://cizzlebiotechnology.com/significant-shareholders/
A quick check of a few other sources (Morningstar, SWS etc) shows nothing else significant.
As there have been no other TR1's since Lang's last buy (other than the unknown level of the nominees) it looks correct bar Miller.
ATB LB
I recall reading that about Wolfram, GTP and Afrimet now. Memory not what it used to be.
Cheers both.
ATB LB
Thanks Troajan - can't find anything mentioned in RNS's.
However, it strikes me this could be part of royalty financing package (Orion Project Finance Facility I believe).
2 of the 6 requirements - namely
• The good standing of all applicable permits and licences (nearly ticked)
• The Company having entered into off-take agreements which meet the Royalty holder's requirements (maybe ticked)
Just a thought
ATB LB
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/TUN/finance-and-trading-update-gg4c8o8k2km92bg.html
"placing imminent"
Is already happened my 'ansom. Deadline for take up was today. I think most understand that more cash is required to get to full production. It's no secret and expected. Next key step is noise test and hopefully EA permit soon after. Permit is required for any further financing either debt or equity imo. Wait and see what happens on that but so far raising has been fairly easy... the clns were oversubscribed.
Anyone got insight into the identity of the 50t off taker? Wasn't aware of an active off take customer.
Perhaps these are pre-production samples?
ATB LB
Evening Cizzlers
https://www.tradingview.com/x/VPPp7zdv/
For those not wanting to click links it's a SP chart with all major events plotted by date. Created on trading view so a harmless infographic which some may find informative. There's been quite a bit going on when you lay it all out.
Fairly obvious but there's a colour code:-
TR1 holdings (Aqua)
Placings & options (Orange)
RNS summaries (Green)
Results (Blue)
I hadn't twigged Spreadex opening up a 3% + holding at 9p in CFD's . These reduced below the 3% reporting threshold at approx 3p. A notorious group - have been a bit of a menace on another of my investments.... Just saying. They may be out now - no actual way to tell for sure.
Also likely that M Lang is still in profit if you look at the timings of the TR1s vs SP.
Don't forget that Miller was also in at 1.5p and still there - at least above 4%
Recent drop and apparent plateau with the weird trading patterns at current level may correlate to the salary options @ 2.2p. Not so sure it relates to the subscriptions. Just my opinion.
Please report any omissions, errors or corrections and I'll pop them in.
I'll try and keep it up to date. May try and add some key financials if there's room, like cash on hand.
ATB LB
Good point about the subsidies. SP.
"Time to market will be faster for the second, third, fourth etc. sites."
Hadn't thought of that element. Makes sense to keep the clever technology under the noses of those that know exactly how it ticks. As you say then potentially the common element doesn't need duplicating in a new location. Just one production plant needs scaling for extra capacity.
Wait n see what evolves on this. It just a guess from me but I can see how it would be a good fit on many levels.
ATB LB
Just a thought... perhaps there is a geo-political case for the back end processing plant to remain in the States.
K Tech are well equipped and experienced to scale up the pilot plant in Florida and could take production level, (pre-processed) feed stock in from SA. Not the most efficient route but this ticks a box for the US policy - a desire to secure long term REE production / refining in-country for their domestic market. There's a real and well documented desire to reduce reliance on far eastern supplies long term.
Just a theory. Of course the front and back end plant could equally be scaled and constructed on site in Phal. Keeping it under one roof with a US TORP agreement.
Personally I think the tie up with Techmet, K Tech and US investment is no coincidence. I have the feeling there's a bigger plan at play.
AIMO - just a hunch.
ATB LB
Posted a link to where I heard about it on the relevant channel.
ATB LB
Vii. From the conversation on the other channel... Check out the mining network vid I posted here 17th may. At about 18:30 on it talks briefly about ore sorting being considered in the feasibility study.
ATB LB
Vii. In the comments of the post it states all seven were ordered and committed to a while back. Also these units have been lying in storage in the UK for some time now. Maybe delivery was dependant on a final financial transaction.
I think you're correct in that the revised production plan only uses 4. It was outlined in the VSA video a while back. So potentially 3 left over. What's interesting is that a certain project located further West is now considering deploying the same xray technology. Not that that project is ready for this yet but maybe these units can be repurposed to look out for tin and copper. There may be some resale value.?
ATB LB
Not sure @greend. I believe it's a cash reserve. Plus 400 or more shareholders. There's a few conditions to be on the nasdaq global.
Maybe it's academic as long as they get this over the line before the 180 days are up with what cash they have left. It is still all systems go despite the string of gloomy caveats in their latest report. It would seem it's still considered viable given they've drafted the prospectus and lodged it... Even after the redemption and subsequent nasdaq notice.
There's one slim positive to take away from this in my mind;
Presumably the remaining M/C shareholders are all fully behind the Conduit merger. Currently their shareholders still need to vote through a set of resolutions to enable the merger to progress as per the draft S4 document.
Point being perhaps the vote stands a better chance of success. One less hurdle so to speak.
Silver linings and all that.
It maybe a side show but this merger has the potential to derisk ciz for a good few years. Personally I view it as fairly key. Way better option than the alternatives imo.
ATB LB
Ps please don't mention Tiz again. I'm sill receiving therapy for that:)))
Yep agree on this. Looks like 79% of Murphy shareholders 'rejected' the Conduit merger and redeemed their shares earlier this year. Such is their right. They exited with a little over 3% on ipo price but took the cash balance from $137.5m to under $24m. Technically their SP should be in the low 8's if you crunch the numbers.
They are talking about still going ahead with the merger by the looks of it but this lower cash balance has left M/C in a precarious position imo
24m is possibly not enough by their own admission if you read the latest quarterly report (linked further back)
Lets hope they pull a rabbit out of the hat before 9th Oct.
ATB LB
Molkys.
This yours?
25-May-23 08:10:16 8.2495 8,000 Sell* 8.00 8.50 659.96 O
Technically the bid was 8 and the ask was 8.5 at the time. Mid price was 8.25.
Your trade was just a shade under this by 0.005 of a penny....therefore it is marked as a sell.
Don't fret about it. This happens all the time.
ATB LB
Thanks. Kind of my point @GreenD - the merger completing would solve the threshold issue. So long as it's completed before October 9th? If not then Murphy Canyon as a SPAC may not be able to retain its NASDAQ Global Market listing unless it satisfies the $50m condition. Hence asking what the share capital for Murphy Canyon is currently.
If it stalls, then it appears there is an option for M/C to downgrade to a different market. Perhaps not quite with the glamour of the original plan.
'If the Company does not regain compliance with the MVLS Requirement by the Compliance Date, the Company may also be able to transfer the listing of its Class A Common Stock to the Nasdaq Capital Market, provided that the Company then meets the applicable requirements for continued listing on the Nasdaq Capital Market.'
I must admit that until I started digging into this I was of the (wrong) opinion that Conduit had until Feb next year to complete the merger. In principal that is right but there are a few conditional aspects.
As there's a draft prospectus floating around now .Perhaps this deadline of the 9th October will force some pace.
ATB LB
@Joe - not as far as know. Hence asking OAPK who seems to be much more clued up on this subject.
https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1896212/000149315223017281/form10-q.htm#sj_001
Pg 26 of the linked article.
'On April 10, 2023, the Company received written notice (the “Notice”) from Nasdaq indicating that the Company is no longer in compliance with the minimum Market Value of Listed Securities (“MVLS”) of $50,000,000 required for continued listing on the Nasdaq Global Market (the “MVLS Requirement”).'
Not sure how this can be as they IPO'd Feb 22 at about $10 per share and it's been steadily rising. In April 23 it was around $10.41. Apparently they met all the listing requirements at IPO so how have they failed the MVLS test a year on with a higher valuation??
What I'm not totally clear on is how many shares are in issue. At the head of the document it quotes 2.94million which by my maths makes $50m about $17 per share. I'm not convinced this is right. Elsewhere it hints at c.11m and c.14.9m which would mean mcap was already >$110m. It's not crystal clear from that document which value is right. It's quite important to home in on the actual figure.
On the assumption it's $17 per share... This would seem like quite an ask TBF.
https://www.tradingview.com/x/j429elIW/
I seem to recall reading somewhere that M/C's investor relations were quite helpful and approachable. I'll email them and ask for clarification unless anyone else has some input on this and can save me the task.
ATB LB