Member Info for Numbers

Yes, the existing MTFB directors probably realise that the peasants are revolting and if the majority of small shareholders don't vote in favour then they're unlikely to receive their last big income generating chance!

Magpies1862, either that or a Freudian slip from Lucky after their boss battered our chances of seeing a decent deal in this RTO. Unlikely to be a current MTFB shareholder so probably batting for the other team.

Goldstinger, I've gone through the numbers in your post and noticed you have a little error. You said that we can pay 20p when redeeming the warrants, which is incorrect.

The Wed, 26th May 2021 15:00 RNS states: "Proposed warrants to be issued to existing Motif shareholders on the basis of one warrant per two Ordinary Shares held with an exercise price of 30 pence and valid for 180 days following Admission (the "Admission Warrants", see below);"

So they want existing shareholders to accept a 220:1 consolidation and then require us to pay 50% more than the other investors paid to buy additional shares!

Yes, IMO they seem to: 1st they floor us with the MASSIVE DILUTION and then kick us in the b@lls by charging us an EXTRA 50% for the privilege of purchasing a few additional shares! That sounds like a great deal (for them anyway)!

The additional 50% cost for purchasing the 50% additional shares that we can buy knocks up our break-even point in new company to £1 or so.

What if you started the MTFB journey buying at 22p and your average is 4.5p? Everyone's entry point and average is different, but most LTHs will be somewhere North of 95% down on their initial investment...

Agreed Saint68, BiVictriX saw how much MTFB was at suspension and their aim will be to buy the cash shell at a discount. IMO the only way we could have achieved more is if the RTO candidate was also interested in all the Iclaprim IP/studies but BiVictriX working in another field.

The problem is there are 100s of small shareholders and people who reject the initial deal all have different expectations on what they would consider to be an acceptable deal. For example I have 77,777 shares in MTFB and usually buy shares in weird combos and a 77:1 share consolidation could appeal to me. A 100:1 consolidation isn't a great result but is a nice round number - on opening our shares would only be worth 40% of the pre-suspension price. There is the hope value that the share will start to fly in the 1st year as demand from new investors push the share price up. Issuing warrants - personally I'm not that bothered but Saint68 wants warrants. So we agree that 100:1 consolidation is acceptable but there is a question mark over issuing warrants. If doing warrants what would people want? Some may say they they aren't bothered, others may say warrants at 100:1 and others might want warrants at a 40:1 ratio. The problem is when there are 100s of small PIs they all have different ideas and expectations of what they would consider to be an suitable deal. Whether BiVictriX would want the hassle of engaging with shareholders and making a counter offer is a gamble. I only have £70 stake money for this bet but there are other people holding much larger amounts of shares in MTFB.

At the moment your money is tied up and worth nothing - are people willing to accept the 220:1 offer and take the guarantee of a few pennies in the pound and have a few shares in a new company that may fly? Are people willing to risk their current stake and do an all or nothing gamble on getting a better counter offer from either BiVictriX or maybe another company? If the majority of shareholders vote no, what do shareholders think is the likely-hood of receiving a better offer against running out of cash and dying? Is it 80/20 certainty, 50/50 coin toss or 20/80? Nobody knows and each person will have their own ideas and risk profile on whether to take the guaranteed IMO derisory 220:1 offer to still be in the AIM game or go the high risk route hoping for a better deal...

I look forward to seeing other people's views on this thread. Kettle, are you in the yes or no camp?

Kettle, I have no idea how this reverse takeover will pan out. I've historically invested in FTSE 350 companies and MTBF was my 1st AIM share. I've no experience with cash shells and RTOs and have no idea if we voted no whether it would be game over or if BiVictriX would counter with a better offer for existing shareholders.

I guess it depends on whether there are other AIM cash shells available right now that BiVictriX could reverse into with the same level of investment. The current directors have put their time and effort into getting us an RTO deal and the daily cash burn will make us look less attractive as time drags on.

I guess saying no would be a coin toss - if lucky BiVictriX decide to make shareholders an improved offer to keep the deal on track and if unlucky they walk away and the directors would need to look at alternative candidates for the RTO. They are backing this deal so they probably won't want the hassle of starting another RTO negotiation. The cash in the shell would be reduced so the next company could offer even less or we may just run out of cash and die...

Kettle, the SP was 0.5p just before suspension. If the new SP opens at 20p on launch then we would need a 40:1 share consolidation to avoid taking a hit on the pre-suspension price. I had hoped that the new company may have had an interest in Iclaprim so they may have paid more to the MTFB shareholders to secure the company and the IP/research around Iclaprim. This doesn't seem to be the case and it looks like BiVictriX were just looking for a cash shell to reverse into to save time/money.

Obviously BiVictriX will want to buy the existing shareholders out as cheaply as possible and knew the original value of the company at suspension and have put IMO a lowball offer at 220:1 consolidation and threw us a few crumbs by issuing us warrants that allow us to purchase a few extra shares at 30p which we would only exercise if the SP took off. I've never had warrants before and IMO issuing warrants for piddly amounts of shares (in my case anyway) is just generating excess admin costs. I'd feel better if BiVictriX kept it simple and offered us a better consolidation rate, say 1 new share for every 100 old shares and didn't bother with the warrants.

I only have 77,777 shares so if the deal goes through on the current terms my original £3.3K "Investment" in MTFB would become £70 and I'd have the opportunity to buy another 176 shares for another £53. It's not a big deal to me whether the BiVictriX RTO goes ahead or not as I'd already mentally written off MTFB anyway. In fact it would probably be easier from a capital gains tax calculation to take a total loss on MTFB if EUA pays a decent special dividend within this tax year.

As an aside I had a dream the night before the fateful RNS dropped - I rarely remember dreams but this was pretty vivid. It was that one of the shares in my portfolio did a 100+ bagger and went from around 0.5p and hit above 70p briefly before settling at 61p. In this dream I tried to see the ticker to see which share soared but I didn't get to see it. Maybe it was BiVictriX taking off, but unfortunately we would still be well underwater if we only get 1 new share for every 220 old share! :-(

Maybe because today was tomorrow yesterday? :-)

Hydrogen fuel cell technology EVs seems to be the choice that both Japan and South Korea have made rather than going down the BEV route.

Toyota has introduced the Mirai FCEV in the UK https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/new-mirai/

Hyundai has introduced the Nexo in the UK. https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/nexo

South Korea is also investing heavily in hydrogen FCEV vehicles https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/061020-south-koreas-hydrogen-ambitions-propel-hyundai-motor-into-top-gear

The great thing about hydrogen FC vehicles from PGM miner's perspective is they use around 10x the amount of PGMs in the fuel cell than petrol or diesel cars use in their catalytic converters. Unfortunately these FC vehicles are still a bit pricey - costing £60K + for a family car. It is going to be interesting to see which of the technologies really takes off. BEVs currently have a head start, but FCEVs seem to be more scalable and has the edge regarding sustainability. The disadvantage is filling up with green hydrogen costs more than charging a BEV via the electrical grid.

Historically, the platinum price was higher than gold up until 2011 when Pt took a dip and has stayed below the price of gold. Palladium did the opposite - it was historically cheaper than gold for years and then started going crazy in 2016 and overtook the gold price in 2018.
https://www.amergold.com/gold-news-info/bullion-charts.php

The industrial demand for PGM metals is exceeding supply, with palladium now being more popular than platinum. With hydrogen fuel cells, it looks like Pt and Pd can both be used. Platinum is currently much cheaper than palladium, so Japan and Korea may start using more platinum which will drive it closer to the palladium price.

IMO all precious metals will continue to rise in the short-term. IMO the biggest percentage risers will be silver and platinum and the palladium price could start to drop as production of new petrol and diesel cars drops in favour of BEV and FCEVs.

Hydrogen fuel cell technology EVs seems to be the choice that both Japan and South Korea have made rather than going down the BEV route.

Toyota has introduced the Mirai FCEV in the UK https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/new-mirai/

Hyundai has introduced the Nexo in the UK. https://www.hyundai.co.uk/new-cars/nexo

South Korea is also investing heavily in hydrogen FCEV vehicles https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/061020-south-koreas-hydrogen-ambitions-propel-hyundai-motor-into-top-gear

The great thing about hydrogen FC vehicles from EUA's perspective is they use around 10x the amount of PGMs in the fuel cell than petrol or diesel cars use in their catalytic converters. Unfortunately these FC vehicles are still a bit pricey - costing £60K or so for a family car. It is going to be interesting to see which of the technologies really takes off. BEVs currently have a head start, but FCEVs seem to be more scalable and may also have the edge regarding sustainability.

Also large scale hydrogen or natural gas fuel cells can be used to supply energy to large buildings. The Minerals Council of South Africa building is powered by a natural gas fuel cell that uses "only 40oz" of platinum!
https://www.mineralscouncil.org.za/industry-news/publications/fact-sheets/send/3-fact-sheets/741-fuel-cell

*aren't following the crowd and building BEVs.

Toyota has introduced the Mirai FCEV in the UK https://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/new-mirai/

South Korea is also investing heavily in hydrogen FCEV vehicles https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/electric-power/061020-south-koreas-hydrogen-ambitions-propel-hyundai-motor-into-top-gear

ceejay1awest, whilst Japan do make Li-Ion batteries they are following the crowd and building battery electric vehicles. They are developing electric vehicles that derive their energy from hydrogen fuel cells. This is great news for EUA as the hydrogen fuel cells require either platinum or palladium in their construction. A petrol or diesel car has somewhere between 5-30 grams of either Pt or Pd used in their catalytic converter. Hydrogen fuel cells need around 10x the amount of PGM in a catalytic converter to operate.

Also large scale hydrogen or natural gas fuel cells can be used to supply energy to large buildings. The Minerals Council of South Africa building is powered by a natural gas fuel cell that uses "only 40oz" of platinum!
https://www.mineralscouncil.org.za/industry-news/publications/fact-sheets/send/3-fact-sheets/741-fuel-cell

Renting is okay for the short-term (under 5 years). If buying make sure you find a place that you are 90% or so happy with and plan to stay there for an absolute minimum period of 5 years, as the buying/selling and moving costs erode short-term capital growth. Timing is also important and right now UK house prices are booming as people are trying to move during the stamp duty holiday to save on costs. Some houses are going for over asking price and gazumping is making a comeback.

With shares a profit isn't a profit until it is banked. If you are lucky enough to have a stock showing a 100% paper profit but think it is still a good long-term hold, consider selling 50% of the shares. This means you can pull out your original investment and still hold half the amount of shares that are on a free ride. You reduce your risk if something unexpected happens and the SP dives but you also reduce the amount of profit you could make if the company continues to grow well in the future.

Volume of buys was over 3x the volume of sells today, so we had a nice rise. It looks like people may be bailing out of crypto and getting into miners now, so hopefully this trend will continue

There were a few big buys and sells of over 1m shares reported.

18-May-21 16:32:03 1.933 10,000,000 Buy* 1.78 1.80 193.30k O
18-May-21 07:31:14 2.20 15,000,000 Buy* 1.78 1.80 330.00k O
18-May-21 08:03:20 2.00 12,362,202 Buy* 1.78 1.80 247.24k O
18-May-21 17:05:22 1.80 3,689,193 Buy* 1.78 1.80 66.41k O
18-May-21 16:10:36 1.75 5,000,000 Sell* 1.78 1.80 87.50k O
18-May-21 16:13:05 1.75 5,567,435 Sell* 1.78 1.80 97.43k O
18-May-21 16:14:16 1.7508 33,333,333 Sell* 1.78 1.80 583.60k O

The 2 biggest buyers today paid between 2p and 2.2p so hopefully the low was hit today and there will be a decent bounce back tomorrow.

I 1st heard of EUA on the SXX board (I didn't invest in SXX) and another board when they were around 1p. By the time I'd decided to invest I bought 22,000 at 2.45p. Between October and February the SP was volatile (could easily rise or fall by 20-30% on some days) and I traded several times to make 10% or so profit on each transaction. It is never easy to sell right at the peak and buy back in the trough, but I usually worked on selling at what I thought was a good price 1 day and buying back in again within 24 hours at 10% lower. Doing this strategy increased my holding in EUA without increasing my initial investment. Everything was going well until my last sell at 6.22p just before suspension. The plan was to buy back in at 5.5p-5.7p again but the price kept climbing so that last trade became an unintentional top slice. Initial investment was 22,000 shares but at 1 point I had almost 100,000 shares before ending up with my holding to 47,777 shares going into suspension. I'd planned to hold 77,777 shares but TBH I was much more chilled out during suspension with being on a free ride with the lower amount.

After EUA came out of suspension I didn't trade EUA again (until just after Alexei sold a few of his shares). I grabbed a few shares at 22.45p and sold them and a few more at just over 26p. Still holding 47,000 shares and I've so far resisted the temptation of trading again...

I was going to say EUA but Pacha has already done that. I'll try another miner then, UFO at 1.2p. They are mining silver and iron ore, both of these commodities are starting to spike. 3 months might be a bit of an optimistic timescale, but UFO share price should start flying sometime within the next 12 months if silver and iron continue with their upward trajectory...

Nobody likes to see the value of their investment drop around 35% in a day. I figured the market was over-reacting yesterday and the share price would bounce back within a few days. HEMO is still working on several interesting projects so I'm happy to hold for the longer term. I bought some more yesterday at just under 4.4p, reducing my average from over 8p to under 6p.

Some traders may have sold out in the hope of making up their losses on another share, as they were only holding in the hope of a partnership with or being bought out by the big pharma company.

Hopefully the majority of the LTHs will continue to hold or even buy more on the dip. The directors have a good stake the company, so have a vested interest in seeing the share price rise over time. They will be seeing a big paper loss right now, but they have access to the cash to keep researching and developing their products.

Roger65 “Just no idea where this is heading but I’m 99% certain a full sale is out the window. The notion of strengthening one’s negotiation position 10 months into an FSP suggests we’re nowhere near the point of finalising a deal.“
I must admit before the 2 latest RNS were released I thought the chances of a FSP were greater than 90%. Now the chances of a FSP by a single company/entity look more like 50/50, the main reason being EUA has more confirmed assets in the ground and are taking on another director now. This director is liaising with a Japanese consortium companies like Toyota, Nissan, Honda etc that are end users of the resources that EUA has in the ground, but they are not mining experts.
EUA are experts in mining exploration and their focus is to discover in-ground assets and quantify them. There are several large mining companies that are experts in digging and processing PGMs. IMO the Japanese consortium aren’t planning on buying the in-ground PGMs and they are attempting to secure a reliable supply of the mined product rather than doing the mining themselves.
IMO it still makes sense for a big miner (or miners) to buy out EUA or buy the right to mine in a specific area. I’m thinking miners as there is so much to mine so any single miner may struggle to afford what the in-ground assets are currently worth and put in the infrastructure to remove and process these assets quickly enough to meet the demand from the end users. Maybe not the whole of EUA will be sold and they will act as a middleman in the supply chain between any big miner(s) who buys into the physical mine and the end users who require access to PGMs. Remember that Dmitry has previously mentioned dividends in previous interviews and set-up Lybrion which could be used in the PGM supply chain, which suggests that he wasn’t planning on a full buyout.
I still believe that some EUA assets will be sold as CITIC and UBS are still working on a no sale, no fee basis and EUA have engaged DLA Piper. The FSB process seems to have taken a relatively long time, perhaps because a variety of different buying scenarios have been discussed and perhaps different miners have been discussing which areas they want access to and several might be forming consortiums to decide which one is mining, who is processing etc.
IMO the last 2 RNS have increased the future value of EUA but it hasn’t been reflected in the current purchase price. I suppose this could be because lots of people thought a FSP was “in the bag” and we were going to walk away with £1 or more per share but the latest news has introduced some uncertainty about the future direction of EUA. I’m personally very positive with EUA in the long-term as they have a strong team of directors who are experts in their fields and have invested a significant amount of time and money developing EUA over the past couple of decades. I’m happy to continue to hold EUA and have faith that the directors will secure the best deal...

The 19 million purchase yesterday should keep the share price on track today.

25-Mar-21 16:04:33 0.59634 19,000,000 Buy* 113.30k O

£113K invested at just below 0.60p ready for news dropping next week...