Member Info for okenia

Joebop: did Andrew put any 'mistruths' in the RNSes? In your opinion.

Not until we resolve your earlier accusations. You started the mud slinging. Are you saying Andrew lied in one or more RNS related to the coal assets? Yes or no.

'Yes' or 'no' surely easy to type by mobile?

Are you saying Andrew lied in RNSes?

It's very big in scale is what I mean. Even a normal asset of that scale is going to take £100ms of capex, that's what big assets require. Look at PDZ - £600m capex. But the overall NPV dwarfs that. Now if you say RGM can't develop such a big asset alone then yes I am fully with you, and yes they will get diluted away as it developed (cf Tshipi). However a small percent of a v v big asset is a material stake to RGM. But as I say, it's a late-cycle asset that needs commodities to get going before the big boys start looking to acquire big new assets to add to their p/f. It's not going to make money in the short term but over a credible cycle time it could be very valuable. In essence it's an optionality play and provided it's held with minimal cost I have no issue with that. In fact I'd rather it was sat on that cash be raised and spent on it at this point in the cycle. The coal is the one that has the potential to do something in a shorter timeframe - the rest are passive investments or longer-term options in essence. And at the moment I think people are very very negative on the coal because of the 'issues' this year - which gives upside if an Xmas miracle occurs and RGM do pull something out of the hat with that one!

Paradoxically the coal is the bit I'm most interested in. Mambare and Moz are v v big but later cycle assets. Curzon is listed and will be what it is. The coal is largely valued at zero due to (cough) 'issues' but if you read the RNS and join the dots - in context of what has (not) happened - there's a clear story that could play out in a v positive sense. The sooner RGM get to see inside the CMC books the better ...

I don't normally have to explain the self-evident to you zumore (unlike your numerically-challenged side-kick!), but wouldn't you think it a bit weird for investors in a company not to be supportive of that company? And unless you are going thru a messy divorce and need to blow assets so The Other Half doesn't get them, the idea of investing is to make money. I appreciate that we often vary in our opinions on RRR and RGM, which is fine - there needs to be two sides to every trade in a stock market and if I wanted mindless consensus I'd go somewhere that involved a lot of clapping and tambourines. As such, you do need to accept that not all the world shares your own viewpoint on these companies, and (unlike yourself) those people are backing their opinion and viewpoint with their own risk capital. Generally "putting one's money where one's mouth is" should generate a degree of respect for their convictions. Equally, if someone comes out and says "I don't like this company and I have taken a short position in it" I pay attention to that.

Fancy buying 13% of Regency, Zumore?

0.8p conversion territory lol. Do you actually understand how these work? I can lend you my equal access buy-back £4.99 pocket calculator again if that helps.

"Last post from me this afternoon" lol I was spot on again :) Shouldn't you be laying down in a darkened room having panic attacks of worry for CLN holders ?

Oh but if only it was your last post ...

Yes that's the rub. It's a horrific warn torn country with massive social issues. It's also richer in minerals than just about anywhere else on the planet. Plus it's a country where you can mine and get stuff out. So on one hand it's easy - as we've both shown - to say things that will put retail investors off. But it's also somewhere companies can make an absolute financial killing. Tough huh? For the record I do hold one DRC stock (a gold play) with a team that has demonstrable ability to work in-country over an extended period. Very good operational results. But still mcap that's tiny, reflecting this aversion of the retail investor base to the country based on their gut reactions and diet of BBC news.

DRC is one of the most heavily mineralised places on the planet, and you can do business there and dig stuff up. It's a helluva lot easier to work there than many other places and the rewards are outstanding. Yes it's not Eastbourne but the majors work there because the rewards massively justify the effort. I rather DRC than trying to get a borderline-economic tiny asset into production in the Peak District national park. Any other bits of armchair worry and panic you want to share? I don't want you to have yet more palpitations that keep you awake, worrying about the impending poverty of the CLN holders ...

A placing involves broker fees. The CLNs are paperwork generated by the company and with cash transferred direct to company. Thus afaik the CLNs have triggered little if any fees as there's been no underwriting or handling of cash by the broker. Much better than a placing from the perspective of shareholders. 10% coupon for unsecured debt is pretty good going - you try getting it!

BCN is clearly at the stage where they're looking to be taken out. That is essential for the cornerstones to get an exit. Typical take-out would be around 30% above SP and looking at the stable sideways trading over recent months / years a 120/share offer would be about right. The issue they will face is the capex (rather high!) and the post tax NPV isn't much higher than the capex. IRR at 26% is ok but not eye-wateringly good. So big cornerstones have little option than to wait, but for looser money here you do have to wonder if tying capital up here is worth the potentially multi-year wait to finally get that 120p.

Not wishing to be a pedant but yes, the CLNs are issued at a premium and no, it's not a death spiral as there's no discount or VWAP-based conversion so no 'spiral'. Instead it's an interest-paying unsecured loan note with the option to convert at a premium to the current SP. It's a simply CLN that has a 10% coupon, 1 year life and the option (but not the obligation) to covert at 0.8p. It's basically sort-of like a 0.8p warrant but with some capital tied up for a year. The question you should be asking (and should be able to answer yourself) is why a CLN holder would buy one of these instead of buying shares at 0.65p on the secondary market. They're attractive for a CLN holder who doesn't mind locking their money up for a year, and in parallel it reduces the dilution to other shareholders (compared to a vanilla placing, which if done today would obviously have been done at << 0.8p and thus causing much more dilution that a CLN that converts at a premium to the current SP).

Yes - there's a few like this. Some do auto-TA for eg.

That's just one of those auto-generated text things.

It's worth re-reading the language of yesterday's RNS. It's all about nil cost entry, 25% free carry, MAGP getting fees and equity in return for deploying WED's cash. Absolutely no-where does it even give the slightest of hints that this deal is actually a massive LIABILITY for MAGP because it is now obliged to co-fund wells alongside the bulk of the WED cash. Which means that MAGP will now have to place repeatedly to allow it to meet its obligations to WED. With a £1m mcap MAGP just doesn't have the firepower to be able to co-fund alongside $18.5m of WED cash.

Give away 30% of your company to WED (...so you avoid being voted off the board...) and forget to mention that it's actually a $18.5m liability because you have to co-fund the wells, other than the starter. Just when you think you couldn't make it up, it gets worse.