Member Info for okenia

"The next trial date in the Worthington Group case is set to resume in January 2027, having started in late 2024. An FCA spokesperson declined to say why this case has lasted so long. One of the defendants has died."

htTps://www.compliancecorylated.com/news/epic-court-battles-weigh-on-uk-watchdogs-efforts-to-reduce-case-duration/

Yes it's $4.1m in USD. That figure includes additional items above and beyond the surety bond - it's the full list of receivables due from Minto.

USD$4.1m = C$4m surety + interest on that + USD$0.4m other receivables (I guess management fees) from Minto

"The unaudited receivable from Minto includes C$4 million arising from funding by Pembridge of Minto Surety Account, plus accrued interest on this receivable, which are to be repaid on a quarterly basis during 2022. Included are also other receivable amounts of $0.4 million."

From Q1 2021 production report:"· Payments of US$20.8m received by Minto from Sumitomo (Q4 2020: US$17.5m)· Sale price of 90% of production up to 1 March is locked at US$4.07 per pound"Copper today is $4.84/lb and still zooming up with no sign of stopping. $20.8m at US$4.07 would pro rata increase to $24.7m at today's copper price, ie an uplift of $4m per quarter. You can see from these number how quickly Minto will be able to pay off that defcon to Capstone. It'll wash through really quickly, after which there will be a wall of free cashflow needing somewhere to go :)

My reading of this:

"Savannah will be responsible for all of the funding of the projects. This funding will be in the form of a loan which would be reimbursed prior to any dividend distribution to shareholders."

(10th April 2014 RNS) https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SAV/expansion-into-the-prospective-oman-copper-belt-kmhbmpmsulcdgy5.html

>>> SAV funded exploration in Oman via a loan to the subsidiary company (that has now been sold) with the view that they would get that loan repaid first from production, before any funds from production were shared amongst the wider subco shareholders.

Thus, I think the agreement is that Force pay SAV AUD$500,000 in Force shares, and will refund (to SAV) $AUD3,500,000 that SAV loaned to the subco, should the assets ever get into production.

As an aside, looking at the 2019 Annual Report (see the sectoral analysis) it seems like SAV accounts for £5,500,000 of exploration spend on Oman, and will now recoup a fraction of that (if the asset goes into production). The NSR also has some value (and can be sold-on) albeit it has little value until production.

Even in the best case and Oman gets into production under Force, its highly likely Oman has been a loss-making project for SAV (to the tune of a few million in direct spend plus share of company running costs).

Correct - Miton haven’t sold anything. The change in percent holding is due to a slight dilution as per 2/3/20 rns that tipped them under 10%

The number of shares they hold is unchanged - they have not sold.

$37.5m to $20m yes. Plus Capstone don't get 9.9% of PERE.

The big difference though is how it's paid for. In the old deal, PERE had to raise the cash up front via a massive equity raise. In the new version, it's a deferred consideration triggered at various production / copper price points. And although they don't explicitly say so in the RNS, the strong implication is that most/all of PERE's contribution to that $20m bill will come from revenue from Minto. In other words, PERE's part pretty much pays for itself. It's really smart deal for a small company like PERE.

After a year or more of suspension there are bound to be people who want to exit - just because of changed personal circumstances, other opps they have found elsewhere in the meantime, etc etc. So I think you're right about churn at the beginning. To me that's a good thing, as it will generate some volume, and what market makers need is liquidity to work with. Some churn at the beginning, with stale money leaving and fresh money entering, is just what we need to kick off a proper market in the stock imo. Hopefully there will be some decent trading opportunities for people to exploit, alongside LTHs.

[AsiaMet has always been an attractive stock to me because it has a blend of traders and very knowledgeable LTHs on for the ride, with the traders providing the necessary liquidity and lubrication IYSWIM - there's nothing worse than a good story with no trading, and thus a spread as wide as the Channel to deter people]

They've clearly negotiated long and hard over this. Capstone wanted rid of the asset, and the dip in the copper price as a result of Trump starting tensions with China played into their hands. They walked away from the original $35m SPA, and now have brought back a better deal.

I'm resisting the urge to suggest we send DL to Brussels to try to get use better deal there too!

levi - re suspensions. There is a quirk to UKLA rules here. You suspend for the first acquisition, but (unless it is so big it classifies as a RTO) you don't for subsequent.

The reason is the UKLA view the change from being an investing co to doing this deal as a change in business - even if PERE had picked up a $10,000 asset it would have required the suspension and prospectus, because of the corporate change. However, once the first has been done and the corporate change has happened, subsequent acquisitions don't require suspension.

If you think more widely, it's rare for any company to suspend for an acquisition, they just get on and do it. It's only when the target is so large and the share issuance so large to constitute a RTO that a suspension is needed.

It was unavoidable for this first one coming in as a shell, but now they've got going they really will want to avoid suspending again for obvious reasons.

duh huh pre-coffee me, sorry.

That was tonnes of course so multiple by 2,200 to get pounds. 50,000t = 110M lb so $55m more revenue per 50c increase.

Even with a more modest production of 10-20ktpa you get a lot of extra cash for modest movements upwards in the copper price. The key bit is the breakeven point ... even a few cents change alters the revenue by millions.

The place for the raw numbers are Capstone and the MD&A filings here:

https://capstonemining.com/investors/financial-reporting/default.aspx

The nice thing about Minto is that there's plenty of historical information on production and revenue. It's all in the Capstone filings on their website. Depending which year you look at, Minto was producing some 30-60,000 lb of copper concentrate per annum and generating $100-$150m of revenue.. You can see how the operational gearing kicks in with production of that scale - if you're producing 50,000 lb per annum and the sale price increases just 50c a pound that add $25m of "free" revenue to the top line. That gives it very high leverage / beta to the copper price going forward (if you believe the copper story), which ultimately is why you buy an miner as opposed to the underlying equity.

Copshaw - there's some prospectus revision paperwork to do with the UKLA which will take a few weeks I suspect.

Regarding comms to shareholders (where there has been much criticism I know). Two points here. First, during a fluid negotiating process it doesn't benefit a company to make a public running commentary. You can see how much the deal has changed, reflecting a shifting external environment. Second, although Pembridge themselves are suspended Capstone are most certainly not. As a TSX listed company there are disclosure rules as well, and even it it were commercially sensible for Pembridge to talk about the negotiations (it wasn't) they couldn't as that is inside information for their TSX counterparty Capstone. I appreciate it's been frustrating not knowing, but that's the nature of such deals and the reason for the radio silence.

The critical thing here is that they've completed the deal, and largely got someone else to pay for it. No 9.9% equity to Capstone. No $35m fund raise (that would have diluted existing SHs). And a staged payment structure that kicks in only once production gets to a certain level, and to certain copper prices. If/when Cu gets to $3.50/lb that payment will fade into insignificance.

As you can imagine, Trump starting a trade war with China last year - just as the PERE fundraise got going - crashed the copper price and made things difficult. That was a double-edged sword - it made fundraising harder *but* also made Capstone keener to get rid of Minto so they could focus on their bigger S American assets. [Minto is too small for them and a distraction]. Fortunately the trade war has continued, which played into PERE's hands with regard to Capstone wanting to do a deal.

As to SP going forward - well that's set by the market ultiomately. The asset is the same. The question to ask is "how much of Minto do I own per share now, as opposed to the original deal?".

I’m not sure what relevant powers the Food Standards Agency has in this case

I'm no TPI fan. However, on the flip side, KAV have now used up their 20% share issuance authority for the current year (remember, they're on the Standard List not AIM so it's different rules) - which means no more placings this year unless they issue a prospectus (updated CPR, financials, regulator approval etc etc - no small task). So there's a clear runway now, and with those warrants being at 12p they're not going to cause any issues until we're getting towards the 20p mark.

KAV were always going to raise more money for the next stage in the exploration ... what I really didn't want was them placing into SP strength caused by some good drilling results, and thus nerfing any momentum just as it gets going. That can't happen now (see comments above), which is good from a trading perspective.

I like KAV because of the scale of their land package ... they're going for a big win, not piddling about at the edges of something sub-scale. Their licence package for the KSW is about the size of Wales (albeit the strip of interest is a line that runs down the middle).

There's no proof until the drill bit hits, but if they are successful then the upside is massive. [And of course like any junior, they could just hit barren sand - although all the VTEM with Budgie the Chopper is designed to minimise that risk].

Not wishing to be pedantic, but Scott isn't up for re-election at the current AGM and there isn't a resolution to vote on regarding him.

Andrew is up for re-election as a director, but that vote has already taken place and passed.

I'm not quite sure what you think happens at AGMs, but generally you can't just turn up and propose a motion to be voted on there and then (for zillions of what I would hope are obvious reasons).

As I said a while back, you could simply come along to the AGM instead of making wild stabs in the dark.

Gobby indeed!!!!

Lol :)

I was at the AGM. If you had turned up, you’d know the answers to your questions. But feel free to guess away, no need to break a habit now.

Stephen is quiet so let me respond, Zumore.

Do you know what’s happening ?

(A) Yes

(B) No.