Member Info for Moneymaker2015

I don’t know if I’d go as far to say £1 would be a disappointment. However, if EUA was to mine the region themselves, at 100k oz per annum it would have made a gross profit to that sum in 3-4 years, so £1 doesn’t look such a good deal after all.

There’s quite a few rumours about the Kola Peninsula, although the dominant name tends to be NN.

Regarding the KSZ, I think one thing we can all agree on is that if any of the big players names get announced, it’s going to have a positive impact on the share price.

With the share price being so long, I think any of those could quite easily move it back up towards 3.5p. Although, I think the main catalyst will still be a production start date. Hopefully, once management has been to SK we will get more news on that front.

No unfortunately the Eqtec transaction hasn’t yet paid off. The shares were issued at 1.79p. Currently Eqtec is trading at 1.47p, so on the books it is seen as a loss of nearly £100k. Long term though it is a very good transaction for both MNRG and Eqtec.

So the Bank of America has now forecast oil at $120/bbl by June 2022.

At the current production level of 4,000 bbls per month, it would give BritNRG revenue of $5,760,000 per annum. Considering the BritNRG’s costs are below $20/bbl, it would be making over $100/bbl gross profit!

Not even taking into account any BritNRG increased production or indeed another of the other projects MNRG has. Just how things currently stand it’s mind boggling how MNRG’s mcap is still £4m…

Welcome surprise this. I thought they would have waited until Monday to release this.

Yes Capt, the balance sheet is looking very healthy indeed! It’s probably trading at NAV all things considered. Remember the $19m is usd and no gbp. Plus, when the 150m shares are issued it will increase the mcap by £5m.

The positive with trading at NAV is that, bar an unforeseen disaster, there’s only one way the share price will be going.

Trump, you seem to have glazed over the facts in your timescales below.

Q4 2019 production was on the basis that the permits came through in April 2019. The permits, which were out out BMV’s hands, didn’t land until December 2019. The very earliest it could have achieved production was therefore pushed back to August 2020. In August 2020, SAU put its 50% up for sale, meaning no progress could be made to head towards to production until after 29th June 2021.

Don’t forget, in this period BMV secured a very positive finance deal and obtained SUA’s 50% on very good terms.

How can you say investors are left clueless if the mines will ever get into production, when the last RNS literally reads:

“ Construction work to commence at Kochang gold mine

· Korean funding partners remain committed to the Company bringing about gold production”.

It’s easy to talk down a stock when you dismiss all the positives and all the facts.

10 green boxes today… I only filtered one person!

With regards to an update, I will be happy with a simple one liner saying “a Contractor is on-site de-watering the mine and production will commence within the next 6 months”. Obviously anything better will be a bonus.

Without knowing the reason(s) for the dissolution you can’t really base any assumptions on that being a issue.

A number of consultants I work with set-up a new company for each project they are working on and then dissolve it once the works are complete. Similarly, if a company is part of a merger or takeover it may be dissolved in order to accommodate a new company name and Branding.

The problem is there’s no explanation to it. We don’t actually know if it’s a positive or negative move. It could’ve been to enable BritNRG to move forward and that will be his sole focus, there could have been disagreement within the BoD, he may have received a better offer elsewhere or it could have been for family reasons etc.

I understand the requirement for releasing price sensitive information, but with something like this, it’s the context for his departure that is the price sensitive part.

The thing I find most odd is that PR had mentioned about big news being released in Q4. I have a feeling the end of Oct may have even been mentioned in one interview, although don’t quote me on that. Then he goes and resigns from the board. Very strange indeed.

Well, considering he was the pushing forward BritNRG, this resignation certainly requires an explanation and some light shedding on what they plan to do in his absence.

Regarding SAU’s 40% holding, I personally see it as very beneficial for BMV. SAU already stated that it has no intention in getting involved in how BMV runs Gubong / Kochang, as SAU are a team of explorers and it is BMV that are the experts in production.

From a future perspective, SAU would likely have sold its other projects to the highest bidder, once a resource had been proved-up. Now it has such a large holding in BMV, it would be in SAU’s interest to sell these to BMV for a substantially lower sum and for them to be brought into production. This would also enable BMV/SAU to remain as the dominant gold miners/explorers for many years to come… or until a very substantial offer comes in from another party.

I didn’t want to filter Braindead, as I actually find that people de-ramping a stock often stimulates positive counter-arguments by others.

Unfortunately, the stuff that is coming out of him these days is absolute tripe! Plus, he’s already proved he’s not a very good investor from when he admitted selling the week before the deal landed, then had to buy back in at a higher price when the deal was announced. So, it’s not even as though his remarks are coming from a reputable source.

I wonder what the NAV will be valued at in the next accounts?

Considering an independent expert valued SAU’s 50% at $11.05m, which BMV acquired for $9.945m. Theoretically, BMV’s NAV should be $22.1m / $19.89m respectively. Both of these are actually higher than the current £12m mcap.

Why would BMV rush to get a website up and running? It wouldn’t have any new content to upload until production is near enough imminent. Time and time again I’ve seen juniors and explorers waste money on new websites, when really it should be putting all available cash into the ground.

Regarding the Prospectus: BMV has released one previously, so I think they’re fully aware of what is involved and how long it takes. Similarly, why would they ask Hill Dickinson LLP to rush collaborating the Prospectus for the remaining SAU shares to go on the market. What would be the benefit to BMV of increasing the number of issued shares quicker than it needs to?

The current mcap and share price here seems to be defying logic now. Oil prices are continually rising, energy prices are rising and gold prices are holding strong just below $1800 (but still much higher than 2 years ago). However, MNRG is going down in value…

It literally doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. If my funds weren’t tied-up elsewhere and I didn’t have a hefty tax bill to pay in Jan, I would be having a very big top-up here. There’s physically only so long that the share price can continue to drop, given the fundamentals are getting stronger by the day. I’m literally preying for EUA to announce its sale now, solely so I can throw a huge chunk of it here. The mcap isn’t much higher than NAV at the moment so it would be a no brainer because the risk is so low compared to the potential reward.

Apologies for the rant… I may have had a tipple or two, or 10…

The “issued” share capital has changed. The majority of companies I hold issue block listings on a regular basis and it’s never resulted in a noticeable change i.e. an influx of warrants. Companies do block listing for different reasons, but it’s to enable them the ability to issue further ordinary shares. As D220 says, it may be the need for extra headroom. However, I wouldn’t want to speculate as to the reason behind that.

Braindead,

So you think the BOD should have spent time and money planning production, without actually knowing if they were going to reach an agreement with SAU? What if a deal hadn’t been agreed… as you kept saying it wasn’t going to be. That would’ve been a waste of funds no?

SAU cannot just amend the terms of the contract because BMV’s share price has reduced. Just as BMV couldn’t have changed to terms once the deal was concluded and the share price rose above 3.6p. The whole point of agreeing terms and signing a contract is to stop parties changing the terms afterwards.

Why would a company suspend when it is fully funded and has just recently doubled the size of its assets? Although, EUA suspended at 7p last year, lifted the suspension a few months later at 13p and the day following day it rose to 21p. So suspension isn’t necessarily a bad thing…

I myself am early awaiting some oil and gas acquisition news before this year is out. It’s been hinted at a couple of times recently:

• Pierpaolo says at 6:50 here that they’re looking to concrete one of the acquisitions shortly and we should hear from them before the end of the year: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BjB_mn0ZHkY&t=7s

• The 1st Sept RNS states “We are taking the necessary time to develop our medium-term strategy, the benefits of which we intend to share with MetalNRG investors in Q4 2021”.

A further favourable oil and gas acquisition could be what finally give the MNRG share price the kick it needs, especially considering current oil prices. It’s baffling how little interest there is here considering it’s a current oil producer, with a number of other projects that all have upside potential. As far as risk / reward goes, at this mcap the risk is very low in comparison to the potential.

Lw, you’re right they are technically all “geological holes”. In layman terms, what BT means is that rather than it being a specified target area, to a specific depth, to prove the concept of the KSZ. They are literally just drilling that location and to the end depth, purely out of curiosity. It’s good idea though to be fair. They have one hole that will penetrate their desired target and another close by that will give an increased understanding about the surrounding geology. The two combined will be much more valuable and cost effective to KAV in the long run.