Member Info for observer842

@Bannor - yesterday: "So you think they asked & failed then!! Do you think we didn't ask nicely enough or they didn't want to cede majority ownership & lose control over direction & time-frames? I'd be interested to know how you believe you're aware of what might be in the minutia of the HoT?"

I have no idea what is in the minutia of the HoT. But negotiation is what negotiation is! For instance, from the get go it's possible, perhaps even likely that PREM refused to bring the option to increase to 50% and above to the table. Or if they were willing, we might have deemed their (perhaps non-negotiable) terms so prohibitive. Additionally, we likely would have had non-negotiable aspects ourselves that might only be brought to the table if they brought theirs. e.g. perhaps in the absence of an option to take to 100% ownership we insisted on the exclusive marketing rights? We don't know. But I tell you what I do know. We would have wanted them to cede everything for a tuppence, and they would have wanted to cede nothing for the moon. Go for the win, settle on the win, win. ;-)

Ob.

Key dates from my perspective:

16 Aug 2016: Collaboration agreement with CIBSE.
3 May 2017: Discussions with Argentarius to raise up to £2m through asset backed bonds.
18 Jul 2017: Electrical efficiency improved from 3.0kW to 3.2kWe.
21 Aug 2017: Argentarius arranged funding apparently falls through.
14 Nov 2017: Accelerated redemption of all securities related to Argentarius by year end.
28 Dec 2017: CIBSE ongoing collaboration confirmed.
29 Mar 2018: Increased efficiency in the regenerator allows commodity grade stainless steel derivative to be used.
12 Apr 2018: CIBSE ongoing collaboration confirmed.
04 May 2018: Issue of £845k of Convertible Loan Notes raising £530k in cash, the balance converting exisiting debt.

I post the above, in the hope someone might be able to explain to me why a group of private investors would be willing to invest £530k in INSP unless they thought they had a good chance of getting this back with a decent profit in a decent time-frame? It's worth taking the time to understand the terms of the CLN. The key points from my perspective are: they are interest free; time unbound; convertible at higher of 0.07p and 25% discount to the previous trading day's closing market share price; convertible at the full discretion of the Company; on conversion, each new Ordinary Share will attract a half warrant at the relevant conversion price valid for 12 months from the date of issue.

My personal opinion is that funding news, or news sufficiently upbeat to raise the share price significantly from here, is coming, and it could be imminent: how else can it make sense to invest over half a million on the above terms? The warrants, which will be time bound, appear to be the obvious kickers to accepting interest free and no deadlines to redeem or convert..

But what if it's a scam, snakeskin merchant on AIM juggling plates and all that? That's why I'm posting - perhaps someone can explain to me how someone can invest over half a million and still make profit on that whilst a retail investor buying in at these prices, almost half the *minimum* conversion price might fail to? Perhaps they sold short higher up? Seems a bit unlikely, but possible I suppose?

Clearly on the way down to 0.07p the fall in the share price was in the interest of those who were on the receiving end of the CLN's - which includes JG, as I warned at the time - and the likely reason for silence. But now? Perhaps the company is bound to silence as news could be imminent? Funding (£2-3m) to production news?

I'd feel more confident continuing to buy if sentiment on here were greater or others openly agreed with my assessment. I presume "no news" and bad sentiment is causing the sells: but what if the sellers know something I don't? Always a worry despite a lower share price looking like a gift horse believing what I believe! ;-)

Ob.

@Dallas - I'm sure you know very well why we didn't go to 49.9% for the Sonora JV's - they were planning on mining the LV first - that never changed, despite our strong attempts to change it - so we used the raised funds to buy into BCN directly instead - and so far we've managed to make a profit with those transactions. If we have sold any of the shares we bought at a pound it was almost certainly at over a pound in the winter ;-)

So for ZULU we invest in stages - *only* if the previous stage was sufficiently promising to justify it. At the end of the process we have a DFS - and we exit. Or not. Depends on what we want to do as a company at that stage.

@Dallas - that's right. We've always been on the losing side with the Sonora JV, trying to alter that position by hook or crook. ZULU is not the same boat. The terms are much better for us IMHO ;-)

@tomcat - of course it would be great to have the right to take us to 50.1%. And do you and @Dallas think that our BoD almost certainly didn't try to negotiate this? Come on. Give them some credit. This is looks like a good deal to me. And yes, there is always risk and they recognise this. Will it be water tight though? I doubt it - but it certainly looks good from here. And if we really want to take effective economic control, we can. By buying PREM. Sounds familiar? ;-)

@Dallas - sometimes a deal is potentially too good to turn down. How much do you think we'd have had to invest in ZULU to get this deal this time last year? PREM is stressed ;-) The deal looks a good un to me, and is structured attractively, and the marketing rights are the icing on the cake: I guess we insisted on them ;-)

@Dallas - or is it because the EMH and BCN share price has gone down, and AIM does what AIM does when there is (constant) talk of a placing... Damn, I've done it again! ;-)

We've the right to take us to 49% @tomcat. But more than likely we'd be doing that as part of a deal to sell out completely I'd say - unless we decided to become a junior miner because no-one was willing to buy for good value at that time. i.e. we are doing what should have happened with BCN - properly this time... Sigh.

@Dallas - because unlike the Sonora JV, the Zulu JV terms will mean they can't go off and do their own thing in the region, as BCN are effectively doing. Oh and we have the marketing rights ;-)

Indeed @Dallas - it will be a very sad day for me if we have effectively sent the BoD to jail by voting against 4, or slapped on handcuffs by voting against 5. Our negotiation hand goes to pot and we lose. ;-( I just have my fingers firmly crossed only a few share @Bannors views!

join the dots... surely it's not just me that can see where they lead?

@Birdseye. Take a watch of:

"INSPIRIT ENERGY PRESENTS THE INSPIRIT CHARGER" (5 Apr 2017)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxbEhHwfkh8

This company is pretty much a 50:50 for me. It'll either be a complete flop, or will shoot to the moon. Therefore I believe I stand to either lose all my money/be diluted to death, or see it multibag - especially from here - so on 50:50 and the current share price it's quite a good risk to return ratio for me! ;-)

I suspect it's currently not in the interests of the company to maintain a high share price so we are where we are. Whilst news could be imminent and we are still below the 0.07p conversion price of the loan: which *we* can choose to convert rather than pay back, I'm prepared to continue to top up.

The two year anniversary with the CIBSE was last week, and we had confirmation several months back that we are still involved with them.

I know it's a bit of a cliche with AIM shares, but (positive!) news really could be imminent if we've managed to overcome whatever issues stumped us last time and/or have funding to take us to production lined up. I'd probably be marking this as a Strong (extremely speculative) buy if I didn't already hold a fair chunk ;-)

Oh, and if you have yet to read the Align Report, I'd say it's essential reading:

http://www.alignresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Inspirit-Energy-Align-Research-13th-June-2016-Final.pdf

Ob.

By the way @Bannor, you are (likely unintentionally) doing a great job of making me mention placings pretty much every day, likely scaring away potential new investors who seem to fear them like the plague on AIM (cough, naked shorts). Are you sure you don't want the share price to go down...? I suspect that some will suspect we are tag teaming this share... No smiley winky face. We aren't. Well I'm not! But I must admit it's becoming very tempting to start buying in again with news potentially imminent - so it isn't all bad! ;-)

Ob.

I'm playing Devil's advocate @Bannor. Seems like since the bunker crew went AWOL, shall we say, someone has to! I'd be much more likely to take the other side of the coin to balance the equation if it smelt too strongly of roses on here. As it happens I understand the plan. I back the plan. But I smell the fear and uncertainty on this board, and yes I know, even mentioning it will add to it - but it is what it is: we need to find money from somewhere, and AIM does what it does in these situations... Just hope our BoD have a half decent plan in place!? Could be very interesting if the play to raise the funds flummoxes the market. £5-£10m for Yangibana would be nice, or a premium placing! Potentially days away ;-)

I wonder if @tomcat and @Dallas have had a chance to explain AIM to @Kiran yet? Sigh...

Ob

I can see why @Kiran sounds exasperated at times! ;-) We are an investment company. We are an investment company! We attempt to buy in before the steep part of the value add curve and attempt to sell when the curve turns. The point about San Luis and (maybe) Zulu is that we have a route to becoming a (joint partner in a) mining company *if* and I repeat *if* someone doesn't take it off our hands towards the top of the value curve or when it suits us. It's called a hand that we have to be willing to play, even though our remit is as an investment company, and in fact our likely desire would be that we'd rather sell and repeat elsewhere. However, if the potential buyers know we *have* to sell and aren't willing to go through to production, then we lose. Brinkmanship 101... ;-)

So in summary we are an investment company:

http://www.cadenceminerals.com/about/investing-policy/

but we better be willing to see through a project to production if the price ain't right to sell! We might have to take a constitutional vote on the matter, though I'm not sure... ;-)

Did I mention we are an investment company? Currently!

Ob.

Playing Devil's advocate I've always got a come back or two in mind - but you know what... I agree! ;-)

Actually now I'm not so sure - it could have been our due diligence. See:

https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20170905/pdf/43m30v7c1pv885.pdf
===[
On the evening of Monday 10 July 2017, the Company was made aware that a number of licences potentially had proceeding priority claimants that predated Clancy's application by a number of weeks.
]===

i.e. it could have been us making them aware as a consequence of our (delayed!) due diligence? Might be one to ask at the AGM if anyone is particularly interested.

Yes you're correct, it's ambiguous, and on further research it seems unlikely that it was our investigations that discovered the third party claims. Glad we discussed this as I had it in mind we were compensated for the discovery. Certainly another lesson, hopefully learned, in due diligence before signing on the dotted line! ;-)

Current price of CLY appears to be the same at $0.003.

This:

"Update on Austrian Leogang Cobalt-Nickel Sulphide Project" (21 March 2018)
http://irservices.netbuilder.com/ir/cadence/newsArticle.php?ST=REM&id=2397111
===[
Furthermore. the board of Clancy, in discussions with Cadence, have considered it appropriate to issue Cadence 140,000,000 fully paid ordinary shares at a deemed price of $0.003 ("Clancy Shares") as compensation for the discovery of third party priority over the 28 overlapping licenses (including the historical Nockelberg and Leogang mines).
]===