Member Info for observer842

Blimey. Who turned off my autocorrrrect? ;-)

One other think @Bannor. AIM FUD and spin to FOMO on a dime - as you well know. LoL. The RNS is imminent. IMHO of course ;-)

Got any speculation around what this might mean @EV? Other than demonstrating the project is continuing at pace. I wonder how long until the TA + sentiment swings in our favour again. @Dallas? ;-) I prefer working on the fundamentals, but I'm always happy to add lower than higher - who wouldn't! ;-)

LoL @Bannor. I'd consider attempting to counteract your play by putting in large orders to sell higher up, but knowing my luck the RNS would land and they'd get executed! No way I will be (or have!) be derisking until we are above 30p minimum, and then we are only talking small percentages of my holding ;-)

LoL @Bannor. Nailed it. ;-)

I think the big question on everyone's lips is whether @Bannor will get his 19.99p buy in? LoL. It never ceases to amaze me what a bit of bad sentiment aided with strong sell TA signals can do for AIM shares. ;-) And yet the fundamentals remain largely unchanged, the project progress, and the deal to take us to 20% is imminent in my eyes with the banks obliged to continue all avenues to help strengthen their hands until it does. It's the way of the world and why we "need" so many lawyers. lol. I'm enjoying adding at these prices, though I feel for you @EV as you stated you are now fully loaded.

Go on @Bannor, set it for 19.842p and end it with 842. It'll make my day. lol ;-)

Some decent analytics showing charter rates coming off the boil the past week.

"Weekly Market Report" (Tuesday 07th September 2021)
https://www.hellenicshippingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Intermodal-Report-Week-35-2021-1.pdf

I count DEV having 11 slots lined up. However, all currently unnamed indicating to me the delicate balance between iron ore prices and shipping rates influencing the decision on when the next slot is committed - all provisional bookings until then.

LoL @Dallas. Not necessarily. Depends if the JV terms between partners are symmetrical. I've seen symmetrical agreements meaning they aren't always penned in favour of the senior partner.. "The First USA contains certain other provisions relating to shareholder rights, with respect to the disposition of shares including any right of first refusal as well as put and call options, and those relating to non–competition, confidentiality and termination." We've been over this before and my conclusion was we don't have enough information to make informed speculation. Most seemed to think that we could be dragged if we declined the first refusal rights during a sale, but we couldn't do any dragging ourselves. Perhaps, perhaps not. And perhaps not worth going over old ground without new information - we still don't know exactly what purpose preventing the initial re-domicile had to protect the JV agreements, and whether this protection was afforded during the subsequent re-domicile. Or do you? ;-)

Nice spot @jimb. It would be interesting to know the details of our Sonora JV's. And I mean see the actual contract, not a summary of it! ;-) If watertight they could be worth $$$ to a third party able to stand their ground with Ganfeng. The only comment from the BoD so far in relation to them is: "As far as the Company is aware, the Possible Offer has no direct effect on our joint ventures. Should the cash offer be successful, it will be highly encouraging for the development of the project, given Ganfeng's involvement in the development of the asset to date, their extensive experience in the lithium market and the fact that their holding company is the world's third-largest (and China's largest) lithium compounds producer."

This bit? "If Ganfeng receives acceptances under the Offer in respect of, and/or otherwise acquires, both 90 per cent.
or more in value of the Bacanora Shares to which the Offer relates and 90 per cent. or more of the voting
rights carried by those shares, and assuming that all of the other Conditions of the Offer have been satisfied
or waived (if capable of being waived), Ganfeng intends to exercise its rights in accordance with sections
974 to 991 of the Companies Act to acquire compulsorily the remaining Bacanora Shares on the same terms
as the Offer."

I presume it is just being crystal clear on the rules over voting rights when you lend out your shares for shorting purposes. https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/05/shortsalevotingrights.asp. i.e. it isn't sufficient for Ganfeng to own say 91% if they have then lent out 2% for shorting purposes.

LoL. I'm so used to putting strong buy for KDNC, as are you, that I accidentally put it on here. Surely yours is accidental too? This can't be a strong buy now? Surely?

You tell me! LoL. When I looked there were August dates on some of the documents if that helps ;-)

@tomcat. I'm confident you'll have seen the documents, but since I don't recall seeing a link on here I thought I'd let you know they are available at : https://www.bacanoralithium.com/investor-relations/ and have been for some time.

It's a difficult one to answer, but this might be of interest: https://batteryjuniors.com/value-analysis/

Indeed @Fingers. "We are in a completely different world now in terms of demand" and this is continuing to be reflected in the increasing lithium prices we are seeing:

https://www.lme.com/en-GB/Metals/Minor-metals/Lithium-prices
===[
FASTMARKETS MB LITHIUM HYDROXIDE MONOHYDRATE: MIN 56.5% LIOH2O BATTERY GRADE, SPOT PRICES CIF CHINA, JAPAN & KOREA, $/KG)
(MIDPOINT)

DATE PRICE (US$ PER KILOGRAM)
02 September 2021 17.75
26 August 2021 16.50,
19 August 2021 16.25
12 August 2021 15.75
]===

As we know WHI in February estimated a risked "today" fair value NPV8 of 129.8p/sh based on conservative inputs, namely: $12,500/t LiOH, $21,000/t tin, 50% probability the project makes it to full production, and 10% probability the size of the project doubles from year 5:

"Lithium development on track in the heart of Europe" (09 February 2021)
https://www.europeanmet.com/wp-content/uploads/20210212-FN-EMH-090221.pdf

From table 1 it's easy to see that once expansion plans are announced and the 10% goes to 50% that the 129.8p/sh goes to roughly £2 per share. These estimates are based on the now apparent conservative Lithium and Tin prices.

The sensitivity graph in figure 5 shows that roughly for every 20% increase in the lithium price the NPV of the project increases by 50%. This means that if today's spot were used their NPV8 of an expanded project would roughly double to £4/sh. And for those that like to use the fully derisked DCF value that's £8/sh. This doesn't take into account the increase of Tin prices to above £30,000/t in recent times.

I make it that an 80p per share EMH is 10% of a fully derisked expanded spot based lithium NPV8 of £8 per share.

How does that compare with its peers?

Ob.

Indeed @Jimb. I know @MBW is only teasing, but at this rate of lithium price increase if Ganfeng don't make an offer soon, they may not be able to afford something we'll accept! LoL. It almost beggars belief how cheaply they are getting BCN for...

https://www.lme.com/en-GB/Metals/Minor-metals/Lithium-prices
===[
FASTMARKETS MB LITHIUM HYDROXIDE MONOHYDRATE: MIN 56.5% LIOH2O BATTERY GRADE, SPOT PRICES CIF CHINA, JAPAN & KOREA, $/KG)
(MIDPOINT)

DATE PRICE (US$ PER KILOGRAM)
02 September 2021 17.75
26 August 2021 16.50
19 August 2021 16.25
12 August 2021 15.75
]===

But what are you waiting for? I'm highly confident we'll get our 20% one way or another and while we wait the project progresses. It wouldn't be progressing much, if any faster if we had ownership today. I'm confident there will be many looking back on this time wondering just why the heck our share price was so low, and why they personally didn't take advantage of this opportunity. As you know I'm not going to be in that camp. ;-)

Indeed @jimb2 - they are really going for it at the moment! http://www.asianmetal.com/LithiumPrice/Lithium.html

This might be of interest for those following the calendar days vs business days dispute:

https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/diarios/1144774384/djsp-judicial-2a-instancia-02-09-2021-pg-1150