Member Info for mogli4479

Although after stating the circa 20% cobalt, the BN then goes on to state the actual cobalt assumed of 1600t. Which implies a cobalt hydroxide total of circa 8000t, which contradicts the 5000t they mention elsewhere in the note!!!!!

I’ve just had another look, following the link someone posted below, and the numbers are different!!!

If you access the broker report on Jubilee’s website it is now dated 9th December. It has obviously been changed since the original was released on 7th December

Thought I was going a bit mad for a minute there

For me, in terms of the numbers, I’ve concentrated on the cash flow and financial tables on pages 14 and 31.
The former breaks down forecast rev and GP for all metals and areas in $ and the latter just has the totals in £.
I added up the rev and GP in the cash flow breakdown and it coverts almost exactly to the financial table using 1.35 ER for all years
So, unless I’m missing something, the Copper GP forecast for next financial year is $20m which seems reasonable, it then ramps up to $78m in YE 2023 and $161m in 2024
All this equates to a profit after tax of £47m £89m and £130m in the next 3 financial years but crucially:
1. Doesn’t include any Cobalt earnings
2. Nothing for Cyprus
3. No expansion on the PGM front
4. And obviously no future deals
As others have said it is a very detailed report, the likes of which we have never seen before

I was a bit surprised to see operating costs at £26m for the year, a substantial increase on PY.
But delving deeper I see that they have written off £18m for the Nickel tailings, which now has a zero balance in the accounts.

That’s the big question Mikie, how much Cobalt can we produce. Total worldwide production was only circa 140k last year

Thanks for your replies,

Basically what I was getting at was that are future profits for Copper aren't circa $9.5k less $4.5k they are in fact:
$9.5k less processing costs less refining costs, and we don't know what those costs are. The $4.5k quoted includes the cost of buying the processed copper....but this is now effectively JLP paying JLP!

Maybe someone could help me out with this.

Before yesterday's news we were told that the JV would process the copper and then sell it to our Sable refinery. Numbers weren't obvious at first but then the $4k cost was mentioned...which I assumed was the cost to Sable which included buying the copper from the processing JV and then the refinery costs (maybe this is why it is fluid as it is proportional to the current copper price). The profit circa $9k less $4k was 100% due to JLP.

On top of this we received a % of the processing profit....the numbers for this we weren't given.

So, now we own 100% tailings (I'm keeping this simple with Roan for now) our Sable profits won't change but our processing profits will now be 100%.

Does this make sense or have I read this completely wrong.

But whatever he held before, be it 0% or 2.99%, there would have been no need for any prior notification

I don't think he has just bought 4.1m shares, but that his purchase has taken him over the 3% threshold.
Happy to be wrong though!

My numbers were relating to the 20/21 financial year

Rounded numbers from the 1st 6 months results:
Gross Profit 31m
Operating costs inc depn -7m
Tax -5m
Net profit after tax 19m
We know the GP from 2nd 6m is 40m, so assuming operating costs inc depn of £8m and Tax of 7m then we come to an overall profit after tax of £44m (I was a little conservative below)

Isn't a true PE ratio based on profits after tax? If so I reckon this will be around £40m for the 2020/21 financial year, thus making the PE ratio already 10.
Although I don't dispute that a forward looking PE ratio of 10 would see our share price considerably higher than it currently is.

Like others have said, once our copper profits start to become reality then a re-rate must surely be on the cards.

I thought the capacity at Mopani, after various Jubilee upgrades to the refinery was 17,000. This coupled with 14,000 current capacity at Sable makes the circa 30,000 quoted...although neither or these are available straight away. The graph under Copper Growth Profile suggests we will hit these production levels in Q3 2023.
Obviously this doesn't include the potential to upgrade Sable, or indeed the Mopani refinery, if the latter is possible.

That makes perfect sense but then how does that tie in with one of the main reasons of an IPO in the first place….to raise capital for the business to expand. This is the ‘catch 22’ that I keep coming back to….maybe I need a crash course on IPOs

Hi Stu, that all makes sense but what happens to the £75m raised in the IPO in your example?

I've been mulling this over in my head. I think there has to be a difference between the pre and post float valuation. i.e. if a coy is valued at £100m before an IPO then surely their after the float they would be valued at £100m+monies raised.

Using an example with a £100m coy, if the owners wanted to retain a 25% stake then lets say the IPO was for 75m shares and therefore they retained 25m. The IPO price would be £4. The new valuation would be £4 x 100m shares = £400m which would equate to the original valuation of £100m + monies raised of 75m x £4 (£300m) = £400m

I could be totally wrong here though

These are the copper production numbers and earnings I have for the various y/e. I cant remember what info I based this on but there must be quite a few assumptions built in. Copper price is assumed to be $9,000, but I have assumed nothing for Cobalt as I just don't know enough
2021/2 8012 = £36m
2022/3 18,786 = £75m
2023/4 23,796 = £96m

3cardbrag, the comparison was more to do with not relying on every word uttered during an interview rather than specifics about future placings.

Le me be clear, I have invested in this company for many years now (since the Braemore days) and continue to hold because I believe that the company is on an exponential growth path which has the potential to take the share price to £1+.

I have never complained about previous placings as I'm fully aware that this is the only means available to raise the kind of funds necessary to propel a fledging company forward.

Whilst I accept CB's assertion that no future placings are needed and I do not believe he is lying when he is saying this, I also appreciate that these assertions have been made in the past only for placings to happen months later. This rhetoric isn't limited to placings either.
So, as I mentioned previously I will take the writings of an RNS as gospel but utterings during an interview with a pinch of salt

I would argue that rather than being arrogant to place caution on what CB says in an interview, it is perhaps naivety to rely such claims.
I will only go by what is stated in an RNS with Jubilee and take everything else with a 'pinch of salt.'