Member Info for mv01

Before panic is spread, for what is worth I think this is a good thing if we will take the RNS on face value.

Some cash is left reported as accessible.

A direct reference is given that is good enough to mid Dec [at current pace of reduced ops]

Then a caveat was given that this could last till end Q1 when finance will be agreed [break or make].

If you are the company, and you have small cash left, and you want to facilitate the timeframe to Q1 end. then what do you have to do?

This is essentially the biggest functional point of the RNS to me. It talks definitively till q1 for a go no go deal, and that monies don't last you to then if for full ops. So what do you do... the prudent thing is to stop what's not absolutely necessary and preserve the cash to the timeframe.

Let's say they did... what is the time element of the opportunity cost? Some people are boasting here that the extra cost goes a good 50m to double up for the added delay here to end Q1.

Imagine going to admin now now. will this take or not a good min 6m? I gamble it will.

So here I am the Glen Apex again. what's best? bid on this now, and throw 20-50-100mil [make your picks] or sit it 6m.

I simply don't buy the point that pre-package admin can happen fast and hand over the keys to Glen.

You are better off at avoiding it.

Quote from Cebo-456:

(between zero and 50 million (20p per share))

just a small point to add on the positive, is that whatever they offered on equity, they get a massive discount themselves as they pay themselves a large proportion to their equity percentage.

On further point, again if i were to subscribe to the narrative "Here I am Glen, the big Apex, and I am here to get the bargain" the only risk I see putting some pressure on them to make some sort of bid to acquire all shares) is if the risk of the whole op goes to administration.

I don't think they will make an incredible low ball offer, risking not getting the vote, and the whole company defaulting and going to admin. To me this is key. If you made an offer you have to be sure you are winning the vote.

admin just takes forever. I talk here from experience, for the folks that may heard of fundingSecure.

It's just an effing pain to get something of value in admin. hence why I say... what might be an extra, 20mil, 50mil, 100mil?? you make your pick... for Glen to come here with a bid for the majority vote.

I really do not have them for fools to grab this in admin...

Interesting... I wonder if I were Glencore here and on presumption of really wanting the asset if I could convince them with a placing of 50-80p. So that's at a discount of 50% of what they paid give or take.

I will take an assist, football pan intended here warmly, and say in my rookie naive thinking which I declare I am, I actually see two positive functional points (sic as I am an analyst by trade) that matter for me when I compare this RNS to the previous.

Point 1. That narrative about whether the funds would last to mid dec vs until end of q1 forces the hand for me for the board to do another RNS and tell us. So come mid Dec they will be updating. The wording forces the hand for an update. Will we run ops or hold post mid Dec is what they will come back having to answer.

The second functional point is that end of Q1 is break or make for a package. No such timeframe was given in the previous RNS. I like this now to be phrased more definitively.

Arguably on the negative side are two points:

Still no mention of what the figure is..

Too long an uncertainty with a 4.5m outlook for that break or make climax.

Take your picks really but i think those first two are indeed positive points.

I think if come december they came back and the true update was they found a way to keep ops on till q1 end and saying the finance deal is progressing it would be taken as positive.

What can trigger going to administration here?

I think if I were to subscribe to the narrative that glencore can do what they want here, has to avoid that scenario of going to administration.

It becomes more complex, in that a liquidator comes in, they set priorities (say for instance sort debt before equity in liquidation) and bears the risk that if assets are put to auction you get 3rd parties interested to bid.

So if I were glencore, can I get this with avoiding this extra time, delay, third party refereeing (administrator).

Would in the outmost cynical way suit them best to acquire this before the needs of going to admin?

I tend to think its easier to just bid to buy already as a strategy rather than all the uncertainty of admin.

If we go bust in dec, i don't see a lorry or excavator turning on an engine for at least a whole year...

So how much is a year worth to glencore for say bidding 50mil to get the whole thing 20p a share say... and assume all debt vs the admin alternative?

So a rough 10mil buyout for other cornerstones and no admin hustles.

What else is there even for them to endure an admin scenario. I don't see it going that way. I think a price will be found for a sale to apex.

This is where I am picking up my signal from:

The Company has hosted a series of site visits during the last 7 days with key shareholders and lenders representatives. These groups are undertaking their respective due diligence as part of a funding plan and expect to finalise their respective internal diligence processes in early Q1 2024 with funding completion targeted for late Q1 2024. It remains the Company's objective to put in place a financing solution which will satisfy the cost to complete requirements and thereby allow the Company to continue to access its Senior Debt Facility.

Yes news broken out 2Oct, but the new RNS says comp reps only went on site after a whole month.

How can you plausibly decide anything as a debt/equity solution provider without going there, check, go back home, gather your facts, put a strategy, come to a decision.

Things take time... [ I know we don't have much] but why read too much conspiracy into it?

And then, as the company yourself might be caught up a bit on the too positive too! You thought maybe a finance deal is a bit easier to get than having to wait to end q1. you do not halt your processes until you are forced to. you are relying on debt/equity ant their timeframe. and you publish the RNS when you realised this will take longer than expected [yes with the added detriment]..

but again... not yet subscribing to conspiracy... I am just thinking it is more risky now, with a smaller upside... but I don't quite see the conspiracy yet...

Thanks wasarunner...

I've got one more point bothering, on the RNS itself, as I really want to see if I can take it on face value without all the doom and gloom and conspiracy theory that goes about it.. [sorry folks!] but nor with all the nice twists and what have you positive wishful thinking of the sort too big to fail or buying more stake on the cheap... [now sorry some other Folks :)].

So the question is this. Could this not actually been an honest RNS of what might have actually happened?

I mean let's imagine for a sec, we discovered we have some issues...

We talk to debt and big equity holders....

They say we want/need to come in on site do our DD, before nothing we decided...

Logistics to get you there... then they say... we need time to go back in shop decide what to do...

cannot happen before early q1, with finance deal [if there would be one] come end q1...

and then company sits down: right we need to do this and that, halt this because with the uncertainty of not knowing if there will be a deal till q1, we cannot keep going at the full built pace...

I mean if this was spot honest on what happened here... how better would one go about producing the RNS's and all the rest...

I certainly don't quite appreciate all the told you so nor this will would fly to riches narrative based on opinion and not fact...

So I ask something else here: could this actually been dead honest and to be taken on face value for what it is?

sure if a beautiful deal comes at the end, the optimists will be ramping..

sure if it is hell, well we gotten a better taste of that from the uber negativists...

But right now, what's actual fact, and what might I take on face value is what I personally care, and to be frank where I'd wish convos to go bit deeper into...

Cheers,

Mike.

Folks, from where we are now. What are truly the possible outcomes.

Venture answers to the below please:

scenario1. Come mid Dec no further cash is available and all work has to stop - no finance deal [as that is now end 2024Q1].

what happens if all work is stopped? still a potential fire sale? and at what price considering, debt and assets to a stopped mine.

scenario2: Another RNS before mid Dec: saying there is a bit of saving, and cash can take us to end of Q1, where it is a anticipated that a finance agreement will be put in place.

2 variants here 2a. more work has stopped, 2b. same critical work is kept going.

what would you say this will do to stock price in scenarios 1,2a,2b; specifically on scenario 1, what are the thoughts on what this can sell for, and how much ending up to SP holders INCLUDING cornerstones. really 10p at best?

Wasarunner thank you!

Now I see the light on B. I guess being a total rookie i had to grasp it explicitly. If all debt options fail, than maybe issue more shares to raise the monies that way, then that's how the 30% 50% quotient to the max-old-monies prospect comes in. I think I now get it.

What about question A. Anyone wanting to venture an answer?

The hypothetical and undesired scenario is set to this:

No deal is made to bridge the gap. and we default.

Some buyer comes in, offers 100mil(is that even possible a price?) to buy assets and assume all liabilities and we get delisted.

question2: how much of that 100mil would end up as a special dividend?

Thanks!

Folks I have a huge punt in this, and I openly declare that I am a foolish ignorant when it come to investing period. But I am being honest in my declaration that my holding is north of 200k shares.

I want to ask a few questions, if addressed in the way posted, might help me understand a thing or too on this.

A.

First and foremost, given that already more than 400$m been spent on site; and if for argument's sake we were to assume that there won't be a a deficit agreement, then what is the worst worst worst possible situation here? I mean if someone were to come in and buy this, what would be fair price? Assume that that is again for arguments sake 100$m where buyer assumes all debt, assets, liability: here's 100mil give me EVERYTHING.

then how much of that 100mil actually pays a special dividend on share? [Amur minerals mechanism say?].

B.

This dilution arguments. Folks earlier mentioned that they even had projections [prior to the devestating RNS] in 6-7y for for the share to have risen to 3-4.50GBP. I am just curious as to the mechanism that now slashes that to 30%-50% of that projection on assumption that some finance deal will be found now, and the mine will say operate for 20-25y as projected. I guess what I am completely honestly and naively scratching my head about here is this:

Sure we are in some trouble now, and maybe will need some form of loan ingestion to say the tune of 100-200-250mil tke your pick. But let's further assume we gotten it, we are able to build a fully producing mine.

how is that 250mil comparing with the billions of the ore to be mined over a course of 25y. That is the persepctive that I am after: why would a hiccup now of 250m put on top of say 2-3billion that the mine stands to make actually has such a terrible impact [of 50%] on the full potential of the stock price?

i just don't get the ratios of how 250mil / 2-3Bil =====> -50% on max stock potential.

I want to understand this things...

Good Luck All.

What bothers me, nothing merely more than at a curiosity level, is why good polite people have the tendency to feed the trolls.

Just let them be.

Silence is golden.