Member Info for Muck165

Interims are, I think, required by tomorrow, so we should get those. In the interview AP said the BP report would issued “along with” the interims, so a fair chance we will get those too I think.

Can anything be read into the timings of news and the timings of when placing shares hit the market?

Ie

2 x Good news releases, then...

Raise off the back of that news, but with only some of the shares hitting the market in Jan, then...

We can expect interims and possibly BP and other news all tomorrow, then...

The rest of the placing shares hit the market...

Now I’m confused ASI!

You replied to mine saying the diamond royalty rate was 20% (half payable in cash), but to Zac saying the royalty rate is 10%?

This would seem to me to confirm it’s 10% total rate, half paid in cash?

https://www.miningweekly.com/article/zimbabwes-new-mineral-royalty-policy-comes-into-force-2022-11-08

I’d understood that whilst the royalty rate is 10%, only half of that needs to be paid in cash with other half must be paid in diamonds. Am I mistaken?

Two things for me stood out iro the diamonds

1. It’s been made clear that part of the raise is to be allocated to costs associated with their recovery.

2. AP said in the interview that he had expected the matter to be closed out before Christmas.

Both of these suggest to me that AP believes the recovery to be close. Whether or not that belief is justified or whether it’s naive remains to be seen.

Of course, AP could just be fibbing, but I don’t think so. Maybe that’s just me being naive.

My bet is that the diamonds are closer than ever before. Unfortunately, I also think that when they come their value will be much lower than some hope for.

Not showing on here so

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/VAST/holding-s-in-company/16306798

Just wondering what others are expecting/hoping for with these, and whether or not we can expect them with, before, or after the interims?

I like the R/R too.

I don't think this is a company going bust and the potential upside from here, at least for me, massively outweighs the downside.

Whilst still having a healthy degree of scepticism borne out of past experience, AP did strike me as having more confidence re the diamonds in this interview and it seemed noteworthy to me that he explained both in the interview, and the RNS, that part of the placing will be needed for costs associated with the parcel.

I used to think like you Oofy but not so much now. It just makes zero sense, at least to me, why any third party would appoint Vast to act, on an exclusive basis, as an integral part of what could be a series of transactions with significant value, unless they were confident in our ability to deliver over at least the short to medium term.

And here we are, having been so appointed twice in the last week.

Just like the Aprevelka deal though, I can’t see why any company would reach agreements like this with Vast if there was concern we’d be bust shortly.

Agree!

Nope. I simply posted a piece of factual information for awareness. Personally I don’t see any particular relevance to Vast and certainly don’t place anywhere like the degree of importance on this conference as others.

For info, the Zim Mining Investment Conference that was due to take place on 25/1 has been postponed.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/postponed-tbc-zimbabwe-mining-investment-conference-london-2024-tickets-770294480527?aff=erelexpmlt

This article from November 2021 says

“The company has concluded a 510(K) initial Q-submission process with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is in the advanced stages to receive the CE Mark from the European Union (EU) for the test.”

https://www.medicaldevice-network.com/news/salignostics-saliva-test-kit-pregnancy/?cf-view

ABDX put this blog out today about the FDA Q submission process.

https://www.abingdonhealth.com/lateral-flow-development-fda-qsubmission-processed-explained/

It’s interesting in itself, but the most interesting thing is that the only ABDX customer I know of that followed this process is Salignostics, and they’ve been in that process if I recall since late 2021 (could be wrong).

Perhaps Salistick FDA approval might be close…?

Mick - all from about 8 mins 26 secs into the AP interview

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_WV6H4nK8w

There were certainly positives, but we need operational cash to be able to realise them.

As n aside, in the interview AP talked about tailings producing 153,000 ounces of gold worth $300m at a cost of $300 per ounce (c$46m) to produce, which at 4.9% interest is worth more than the diamonds.

Happy to be corrected, but broad brush it seems to me that the 4.9% interest in the tailings would therefore be ($300m value -$46m production cost) x 4.9% = $12.5m

So it would appear AP has, as far as I am aware, let slip what the value of the diamonds are, ie less than $12.5m

As I say, happy to be corrected

He looks exhausted and low, which I suppose isn’t surprising given Andrew Hall is yet to be replaced. Whatever I think of AP, I hope he’s ok health wise.

Just on the diamonds, but if we were auctioning them this week as some have suggested, then surely AP would be able to do better than say he’s had confirmation they exist from third parties. For my money, they are still in the RBZ and we haven’t seen them. If that’s the case then the prospect of getting and selling them before 29/2 seems pretty remote to me.

Just an observation, but in the presentation Yates said that nearly 50% of our customers are US customers, but the final results to June confirmed that only 21% of our revenue came from the US/Canada (albeit that was a 373% increase on the year before). Very broadly speaking I would have thought that it should be nearer 50% of revenue, so I wonder if the revenue increase in H1 this year owes to an increase in the number of US contracts over that period?

Musing really, but it would be great to see us more and more established in that market.