Member Info for observer842

It went through on the AQSE @Bannor. From what I can tell it did hit 25p there...

Stop loss fished by the MM's? Anyone want to claim it?

Brilliant @EV! Very strong buy below the BoD's 29p options IMHO. The project is progressing, ships are sailing, revenue is flowing, the 20% is (presumably!) imminent. ;-)

Talking of buyouts. Is anyone prepared to state what their lowest price per share offer they would be willing to accept today is? And if you like, post 20%/27% Amapa, or any other number of hypotheticals if you must. LoL. Personally I can't see the BoD recommending a deal before we get our 20% of Amapa, and without their backing I, and I'm guessing many other holders, are unlikely to back any cheeky offers at this stage.

Not that it matters much - but corrected: "e.g. we could easily see a contribution of £475m * 5% / 47.5% = £50m rising to £900m * 10% / 45% = £200m and beyond in time. :-)))"

You've hit the nail on the head @EV. Market participants just don't know how to value our JV's - it's hard! Take that Sonora one for example. What's BCN market cap at the moment? Without Zinnwald contribution? Perhaps £200m for Sonora? Assuming no mine expansion plans (yeah right!) IIRC we have 3.6% associated with the NPV of the current mine plan or thereabouts. BCN now has only half of the remainder, which means the contribution to our share price using this measure compared to BCN's is £200m * 3.6% / 48.2% = £15m. If Sonora makes it to production there is simply zero chance IMHO only 3.6% of the mine plan will be associated with KDNC's Lithium. And as that percentage rises and progress is made so does the NPV and percentage of NPV. e.g. we could easily see a contribution of £450m * 5% / 45% = £50m rising to £800m * 10% / 40% = £200m and beyond in time. :-)))

As things stand today, I'd be disappointed if we sold out for less than 5%, and (pleasantly!) surprised if we sold out for more than 10% of their market cap.

Don't know where the rig was intended to be installed. I don't think they finished installing it before bankruptcy was declared. I can't find the link now, but I'm pretty sure some of the historic debt is related to the cost of the rig. Perhaps part of the $135m for the banks as part of the 70% port rehabilitation as noted here:

"Heads of Terms to Acquire Interest in former Anglo American Iron Ore Mine, Amapá, NE Brazil" ()21 May 2019
http://irservices.netbuilder.com/ir/cadence/newsArticle.php?ST=REM&id=2790390
===[
In March 2013, before the acquisition was completed the port facility suffered a ground failure which interrupted production and mining subsequently ceased in March 2014. Anglo American completed the sale in November 2013[7]. During 2014, reconstruction work commenced at the port with some iron ore concentrate product being shipped during Dec 2013 and into 2014, via an interim barging solution The Amapá Project borrowed US$135 million senior debt from a banking group led by Intesa São Paulo and rebuilt 70% of the port.
]===

I should note there is a difference in the images, indicating it is being righted, but I got the impression from your post that it had moved off to the left?

I never got round to registering for that site you mentioned last week @MLQ, though thanks for sharing! There's a great free view of the public and private ports yesterday. Are your images of higher resolution/quality/frequency? Do you know which satellite they come from? Perhaps we can find a free source we can share on here that doesn't require registration?

https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=18&lat=-0.06071&lng=-51.16732&time=2021-08-06&preset=1_TRUE_COLOR&datasource=Sentinel-2%20L2A

I can't discern any difference in the location of the jack-up between mid June and yesterday that you mentioned? Do I need to go further back?

https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=18&lat=-0.0569&lng=-51.18206&time=2021-06-22&preset=1_TRUE_COLOR&datasource=Sentinel-2%20L2A
https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=18&lat=-0.0569&lng=-51.18206&time=2021-08-06&preset=1_TRUE_COLOR&datasource=Sentinel-2%20L2A

Is that net profit per wet tonne off the same sale price per tonne? I read it as the early ships having more spin up/getting started costs associated with them. It'll be interesting to see what sale price and realised net profit is achieved on the next $10m!

Indeed @EV. You can see in the haul that one of DEV's first three were FOB, presumably to test costs. $80 sounds about right - though I haven't got the calculator out! ;-)

You've got half the letters right in that spelling. And two fifth's in the correct spelling. ;-)

K: :-)

Well that near doubles everything. Just hopefully not the time to completion with the banks! Which could land tomorrow. ;-)

It wouldn't surprise me if there is a soft deadline between the parties, beyond which this might be a possibility...

@EV, I think what @Bannor writes makes sense. It's on the premise that (one of) the banks is *purposefully* being slow. Whether or not it is, is anybody's guess. For sure our BoD wouldn't say so in public, even if they thought it in private.

I like the sound of "(v)" @EV! :-))) Thanks for the reminder.

Why a fill or kill @Bannor? Why not put a large enough regular order in for say 26p and the FUD around here and the MM's desire for liquidity might just see it filled. If that's what you want?

Indeed @EV. What I quoted also happens to be the answer to the oft asked question: what if the banks don't sign?