Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
lobo
With reference to your post yesterday:
"That is my issue... why even refer to expectations if you have never made any public? Particularly when the only finite range of outcomes that were actually on the table (i.e. filed into court) were $70-90m (Dow model up to 2021) to $400-500m (QD uplift model) and these were not inclusive of rest of world or payment (up front or running) for license, it is extremely confusing and it is exactly what caused panic and fear"
The only figures I have seen are those in this court document on P17. The lower figure is considerably north of your Dow model.
https://www.docketbird.com/court-documents/Nanoco-Technologies-Ltd-v-Samsung-Electronics-Co-Ltd-et-al/Exhibit-1/txed-2:2020-cv-00038-00150-002
Whilst I appreciate that I'm speculating as much as the next man, given the accepted strength of Nanoco's case against Samsung and partners, I really don't see any mileage in the BOD of NANO agreeing on any figure that triggers a 50% payout to the funding team.
So, in the first instance what sort of settlement would trigger a 25% payout and vice versa, a 50% pay out ?
I believe note 4 is saying that a 21 day guidance doesn't really bring much to the party. A more detailed report will follow.
Confirmation has been given on current volumes.
"Assumption" should be viewed in light of the first part of that paragraph/statement. You cannot have one without the other.
https://www.perenco.com
It's owned by the Perrodo family.
Forecast to be around a year away:
https://cceonlinenews.com/2022/10/19/niger-benin-oil-export-pipeline-is-30-complete/
cplloyd
Thanks for that. I should have asked Mr Google.
https://www.energyvoice.com/oilandgas/africa/ep-africa/430699/chad-perenco-first-glencore/
Don't see why they should have, unless they have been greasing. I stand to be corrected, but they do not operate in Chad, although they have a presence in Cameroon.
Not ideal but if, as the Company states, the deal is watertight, then perhaps the Petronas assets become the sweetener for whoever the other interested party might be.
That should certainly stop any fun and games moving forward. It wouldn't be in anyone's interest.
cyb
I believe Chad and Cameroon are both mid and upstream assets.
https://wp-savannah-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2022/01/2022-01-04-Investor-Presentation-FINAL.pdf
dellfrog
I believe we are talking about two different things here.
In general,market maker prices are driven by computer algorithms, which is why they can change so quickly in high volume instances, particularly with penny shares.
The examples you have given are the published trades from one of the platforms and they are always indicative based upon the mid price of the spread prevailing at the time. Matters get distorted when a buy or sell is just above (sell) or below (buy) the published mid price. Spreads can get wide or narrow, usually depending on volume and if you have the time and the inclination, you can check the real buy and sell prices at any given point in time by enacting "dummy trades" on line.
For an investment in a share such as SAVE, these nuances shouldn't really be of concern.