Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
@chisler
Sorry chisler, you've got me there, as no one but me actually said anything, so I'm sorry as I really didn't want to trigger your recurrent paranoia, particularly whilst just trying to pay you a compliment - so much for the element of surprise, eh?
Anyway, as you probably don't have any use for it, perhaps I could have my olive branch back?
Still as I said before all the very best.
@Kimhappy
Sorry Kimhappy I had meant to get back to you earlier, because I do feel your pain honest, so when you say, 'I think you should actually leave...you just go on and on and on and on. So boring its unbelievable', I do get it, facts just aren't everybody's cup of tea. If they are not for you, then nothing I can say or do is likely to make them so - sorry about that.
Still on a brighter not I can actually help you out on the part about me leaving, at least for you, and anyone else of a similar mind.
I know that you are wondering how I'm going to do that, well simply put, I'm not but you are. So here's what you do: on your screen, Find the heading 'Share Discussion for Emmerson' and see three Tabs immediately underneath, and the one on the right is labelled 'Filters' (ok). Click on 'Filters' and a small window will open allowing you to enter my nickname (e.g. OnlyOneShareMe). Once you enter this, then click on the 'Filter Chat' button immediately below, and BINGO, I disappear without trace.
Anyway just before I disappear from your view, you had a PS '..not that its any of your business but I sold just under half [400.000] of my shares 3 days ago' - you are of course completely right, none of my business, but I expect chisler will be very happy with them.
That's all from, me so I will wish you a fond farewell.
Continued from previous post.
On the subject of bristolblue's brain dump posts, I believe you said, 'Now you and Mr Jinx, are typical of 'herd' mentality in that you failed to see the point (along with 7 other Herd members) of the post stating facts about a dozen or more Potash mines, that will undoubtedly bring fertilizer to the market before EML', but once again the actual facts are scanty. Not your facts this time, but even a brief examination reduces your, 'about a dozen or more Potash mines', to the nine actually listed, excluding Emmerson of course, but I have to ask. So what? As we know the Potash market under normal times is very well controlled, and as such only grows in line with the overall growth trend, which has consistently followed around 2-3%pa regardless of fluctuations up or down of greater magnitude. Then seemingly without much thought testpack3, you throw in, 'Now there is a business philosophy revolving about supply and demand', which is an unusual way of describing the economic theories of supply and demand. I've only heard it described previously in terms of a philosophy, by ardent communists (which I presume you are not), as in most of the World, the theories are generally considered to be Laws, as they are so widely accepted and demonstrated on a daily basis. Wars or sanctions aside and especially whether or not you 'express a rabid belief in Potash prices inexorably rising ad infinitum', potash prices will, like all other commodity prices rise, but assuming demand doesn't consistently outstrip demand, these prices rise as a trend, in line with inflation. Sorry if you have been struggling to keep up, as at this point I am going to introduce a paradigm shift and suggest that for the purposes of this argument Supply and Demand theory is really a red herring, as a major factor that draws investors to Emmerson is the simply that it can sell it's product, into it's target markets, at prices that would bankrupt most of it's competitors, whilst still making a profit. So in the well managed Potash market, major suppliers will always reduce the supply when faced with oversupply, rather rather than continue to sell at uneconomic prices.
Finally testpack3, If you are making money from your investment, what's to complain about? I'm very pleased for you, personally on paper, I'm not having any problems in that department either, but profit for today is not the prize that I have my eye upon. As I've said before speculators just don't have the appetite to hold whilst something's built, but investors do - your choice, not mine, but neither is right or wrong, but based on your comment, 'that EML is a 'better bet' was somewhat ill timed', I'm just surprised that you haven't followed the smart money. ;o)
@testpack3 28 Mar '22
Of course Testpack3 I copied your posts verbatim, so obviously they wouldn't prove that you said that anyone should sell, which is of course a fine defence for a 'Lone Wolf', but by your own statement, 'I am not a 'Lone 'wolf' since there are a few others here who share my sentiments'. Then as you know from your studies of Donald Trump, with followers ,
every time you post your intention(s) or decision(s), you are tacitly inviting others to do the same as you - I believe the normal term for this is incitement. But as only one other poster said, 'Brilliant points @testpack......gonna give it until end of q1 and if no permit take my little profit and sell up', we will just let that pass, eh?
Perhaps though as you insist that you have followers your are actually, 'the Herd' and we others are merely a bunch of 'Lone Wolves', who merely agree a lot of the time, I mean there are probably hundreds if not thousands of 'Lone Wolf' investors here, so there's nothing wrong with that. I certainly never said that there is anything wrong with how anyone choses an investment style, be it Investor of Speculator, and as GW62 kindly pointed out, 'I think we are all in the same boat. If OOS loses everything if the EISA is not approved, we all lose in the same way. It's the same gamble for everyone'. To clear up one point, yes I am taking a gamble, but who amongst us has not taken a gamble, simply by purchasing a share? Clearly there is only one boat, but if some 'investors' decide that they want to row in the opposite direction to most others, that is up to them to decide if that makes sense.
To be continued...
@chisler
Some people might say that we have had our differences of opinion over Emmerson in the past, but reading your post here, I was struck by the fact that you could easily have made your investment and never once mentioned your new found confidence in Emmerson at this time. As such may I be the first (and possibly the only) person, to applaud not just your investment, but the fact that you have chosen to do so publically.
@Kimhappy Looks like it is time to wish you a fond farewell for now, but, 'As testpack says. You can always buy back in. This will play out for a while if the permit lands'.
So hopefully we will see again soon ;o)
Continued from previous post...
3. Although ideas, I'm not actually disagreeing with the proposition, ' that senior government stakeholders, beyond the normal process, appear to have intervened and asked for more value', but that may be in the form of investigating if a Moroccan debt finance package could be negotiated, and perhaps opening the time and space to do this.
I cannot say that I am in any way an expert in Muslin Debt Finance, but in broad terms as interest cannot be asked for on a loan. So instead, a method whereby the debt financing organisation or consortium actually pays for and owns the goods or services required. Then resells them to Emmerson at a future date, at a pre-agreed increased value - which sounds pretty complicated to calculate, and contract for, as to actually buy the items back, Emmerson would still need to operate the elements (like the processing plant), it was going to buy, in order to raise the money to pay for them.
Personally this sort of negotiation would potentially require a lot of effort from the Emmerson team, and could demonstrate an above and beyond commitment to increasing Morocco's upfront share of the cake wherever possible . I must admit I don't even know if this a realistic possibility, but it is one area that Emmerson haven't mentioned , and wouldn't be able to mention before all Debt Finance options had been considered, but might just end up being very favourable for Emmerson, to effectively have a fixed price deal at the outset, when Inflation is likely to move the goalposts on a non-Muslim Debt finance package.
@bluepalace you say, 'With a 2 year + construction period, it is still not clear when construction will start. Obviously raises the risk of further shareholder dilution at some point'. On the construction start date, that is dependant upon the ESIA Approval and the Debt Finance agreement being completed, but in terms of the construction Timeline, as far as I can see that is unchanged from the 2 December 2021 RNS, which stated. 'The Contract, signed on time and within budget, prioritised to address the Project's critical path focused on achieving first production early 2024'.IMO nothing has changed which alters this, but possibly the possible target of Q3 for Debt Finance, may take longer as suggested in the Shard Update 25/02/22 . This 25th March 2022 Shard Capital update stated, 'we remain comfortable with our highly conservative view on development timelines for a single phase construction. We have pushed back first production in our DCF from mid-2024 to mid-2025, assuming final permitting/financing is completed by the end of 2022 and then allowing a 2-year construction period'. As such the current finance will cover the works already in train.
@MrJinx, As already mentioned any changes to the expected terms like the Tax holiday, would need a change to Moroccan Law, which hopefully is very unlikely for the reasons already stated.
Continues in next post...
Continued from previous post...
2. I personally took comfort in the part of the RNS stating, 'The Morocco Now campaign at an event in London, was attended by Emmerson CEO, Graham Clarke. Morocco Now is a new economic brand launched by the Moroccan Investment and Export Agency that aims to build the economic position of Morocco and promote the kingdom as an investment destination', as it seems to cast Emmerson in the role of 'Poster Boy' for this initiative. As such potential new investors will no doubt be keeping a keen eye on how Emmerson is treated, and how easy it proves to negotiate the various interactions with all levels of the Moroccan Government.
Obviously a certain quid pro quo may have been negotiated with Emmerson to perhaps, endeavour to turn its oft stated aim of, 'developing economic strategy of the country through a mutually beneficial partnership', into something more tangible - But anything that Emmerson does here will also have to fall squarely within what is allowable by the UK Bribery Act 2010 Section 7, of which I'm sure both the BoD and the Moroccan Government are undoubtedly aware of.
As such IMO, this would rule out the possibility that, 'Emmerson may have been challenged to offer a solution and may have offered several already', on this basis, just because it would be very difficult to characterise something that looked overly generous, particularly offered at this time, as anything other than a bribe, and OCP agreeing a deal insulating it from full market price, without offering significant value in return, would not only look like a bribe, but additionally to competitors, it might look like an unfair subsidy as well, leading to possible sanctions.
Continues in next post...
Understandably when actual information is in short supply, everyone starts to mentally prepare for possible issues, myself included, but at least the RNS did not report any actual causes for concern and most of those suggested as possible after, will prove to be unfounded?
@Ideas you raise a number of intriguing points, which in turn started me thinking, so for what it is worth, I will take this opportunity to offer my own personal perspective on some of them, which may or may not alter your perspective. Starting with the easiest to address ideas, you say, 'Perhaps understandably if wheat prices will damage the economy and the difference has to be found and made up'.
On the face of it this seems quite plausible, but here is some additional information suggesting that wheat may not prove to be a serious issue for Morocco going forwards:
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/03/347788/morocco-sources-only-1-9-of-its-agri-food-needs-from-russia-ukraine
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/03/347966/minister-recent-rainfall-has-immediate-impact-on-moroccos-agriculture
I'm not so sure about the next one...
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/03/348029/spanish-analysis-claims-morocco-could-solve-africas-wheat-crisis
And if you are pondering the broader potential destabilising effects of the Ukraine/Russia war, this document contains a fair bit of information:
https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/osginf2022d1_en.pdf
I don't know if this alters your opinion of the possible effect of wheat prices in Morocco at this moment ideas?
Anyway whilst IMO I agree that all Governments will try and squeeze as companies inwardly investing to exploit local resources it is difficult to know quite how that might manifest itself because:
1. Moroccan Law 33.13 of July 2015 and its implementation decree in April 2016 dictates how the new mining code sets out what happens - In its global survey of mining companies 2015, the Fraser Institute ranked Morocco’s mining legislation among the top 10 most attractive in Africa and 24th place globally. and in terms of the fiscal provisions, the mining industry elsewhere has become accustomed to granting between 10 and 15 percent (or more) in mining projects to the host government. But in Morocco there is no such requirement .
So to ignore this framework at this point in time would require a change in Moroccan law, which in view of the 'Morocco Now' roadshow which is now touring the Globe, any such change would certainly stop this initiative in it's tracks, as you already noted, ideas, 'I think it’s unlikely that a shareholding would be mandated because it would be a fundamental restart on the inward investment environment'.
Continues in next post...
Steady on chisler, you haven't joined the civil service I hope, and started to do everything in triplicate? ;o)
@Edfinvest
Another strange one like the other day, but the info from the actual London Stock Exchange trades download file shows the two entries below:
2022-03-31T14:45:48.007 GBX 3.5 360000 12600 Off-Book AIMX CANC P
2022-03-31T14:45:48.007 GBX 3.5 360000 12600 Off-Book AIMX P
Correct me if I am wrong, but seems to suggest a rogue entry which was backed out straightaway, but I totally agree a quick purchase at that price followed by a sale at the 7p mark would have been good fun. ;o)
@Taipan71
It all started so well, and to think I actually berated MrJinx for being too hard on you. Obviously MrJinx, I apologise unreservedly, I was completely suckered in, by yet another 'Lone Wolf', also telling us all how they have minimised their risk as much as they can, but they still expect to make shed loads of money - and ironically they probably will if they can buy up shares quickly enough, to become an actual investor rather merely just another, also ran speculator.
All I can say to each of the Emmerson, risk averse 'Lone Wolves', is ATB, and you better nail down your starting blocks soon, because come the day, you will be racing only each other, to snap up whatever shares are floating around at that moment, as none of the actual investors here will selling any.
And finally Taipan71, I do really mean ATB, because at least you didn't have the gall to tell the LTH here that they are just an opinion less 'Herd', to validate your own position.
@Testpack3
I'm starting to wonder what precisely is holding your ears apart today 'Lone Wolf', that makes you say. 'Operational Update, 2/12/21, failed to say, was that any contract that had been signed, or being negotiated, was subject to 'all necessary regulations being awarded'
Why would any one need to specify that a contract for 'basic engineering designs' would need to be subject to 'all necessary regulations being awarded'? - The RNS clearly states. 'This is part of the upfront capex, rather than an additional cost, and moves us firmly into the pre-construction phase'.
Get it? => the pre-construction phase
Really MrJinx, If you were responding to my posts I could perhaps understand your tone, but was it called for in this instance? Strangely though, your own comment to Testpack3's post earlier, ' just because you’ve still got a little bit of teenage angsty inside of you where you need to fall out with people just to feel validated', seems unexpectedly apposite in this case.
Personally, I thought that the article located, was a gem of a find, that quite possibly might never have come to light otherwise - I mean the search term 'Morocco Gatekeeper', is hardly an obvious choice. I admit I wouldn't necessarily draw all of the same conclusions as Taipan71, but it is definitely plausible that OCP would have Emmerson under the microscope currently. As potash supply moves more into the strategic arena than just another commodity, with uncertainties increasing. Certainly Morocco continues developing its influence globally, but especially within Africa, by literally spreading fertiliser - obviously such a plan wouldn't work so well back in the days of plain old manure. ;o)
I was heartened though by the report's conclusions, which with the exception of the additional impacts of the Ukraine Russia war, were otherwise current, and reiterated Morocco's sizable foreign investment requirements , 'The kingdom requires additional multibillion-dollar infrastructure investments to achieve a sustainable, carbon-neutral fertilizer industry. Such investments provide the United States and Europe an opportunity to raise the level of their strategic engagement with Morocco'.
IMO this is one of the main factors that precludes OCP taking the Khemisset project over at this stage, where all the investment and the actual build is still to come, so any any takeover would just acquire a valuable asset with potential, but no immediate Potash supply.
On the plus side though, OCP are on record as actively seeking to leverage the Moroccan economy, through both, local JVs, and also by cutting back on imports wherever possible, but it had seemed as though the OCP strategy was to let Emmerson shoulder all of the development risks, at least for now.
Now though the whole landscape has changed and IMO, OCP must be considering sharpening it's focus on securing the eventual potash supplies from Khemisset, which hopefully will lead to some sort of offtake agreement, possibly even one with some sort of equity provision. In a pre-sanction, pre-war global economy, OCP might have been content to hold a watching brief on Emmerson, but now at very least they may feel moved to secure the inevitable potash supplies in some fashion, lest they fall into the hands of a competitor.
On the contracts from, there may be a desire to see the output from the design work packages, before processing the ESIA approval, but IMO I cannot see that build contracts could be signed before it.
Finally, the report did offer a possible windfall to Emmerson of Green SOP Production using Local Green Hyd
@Wiselyinactive
The excerpt below is downloaded from the London Stock Exchange web site
https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/EML/emmerson-plc/company-page
2022-03-28T09:07:41.087 GBX 3.8 100000 3800 Off-Book AIMX CANC P AIMX
2022-03-28T09:07:41.087 GBX 3.8 100000 3800 Off-Book AIMX P AIMX
Which appears to show one trade cancelling another.
Personally AudibleEnergy, I would still go with MrJinx's, 'If we get to 8p, I’ll afford myself a knowing smile of satisfaction. 10p, I may start having a quiet giggle. 20p and I may even go and have a few beers. 40p, I’m having a party and I’m inviting my enemies so I can burn £50 notes in front of them....'
@testpack3,
Please excuse my tardy response testpack3, or should I refer to you as the 'Lone Wolf'? Just a thought you understand, but if you really see the Mainstream EML investors as 'The Herd', it seems axiomatic that 'Lone Wolf', must be how you see yourself?
So when you ask, 'Tell me when I have posted that one should sell this share'? Knowing that one was you, I thought I should do a little research before answering. Now I freely admit that I am a great fan of your back catalogue - so many shares that you are interested in; so many SHs you disagree with, and so many BoD's to dwarf and outshine with your truly dazzling intellect.
Seriously though, who knows, you might just be as smart as you think you are? Perhaps you just aren't very keen on wining any popularity contests, but I'm guessing that's the way the 'Lone Wolf' likes it - eh?
Still I digress, apologies in advance If I have overlooked anything worth remembering:
17 Mar 2021 13:17 - I held about 1/2M shares but sold about 60%
23 Apr 2021 21:18 - I still hold shares, but drastically de-risked from earlier holding
03 Jun 2021 14:55 - Another thing he wouldn't like is my 100k buy at the 'right' time. lol. I'm going to sell those 100k
21 Jan 2022 14:08 - Have sold 1/3 of my holding as a precaution.
03 Mar 2022 15:33 - I have over the past few months reduced my position to a small holding.
So 'Lone Wolf', is this the information you requested? somehow I'm guessing not, but suffice to say that due to progressive de-risking and timely trading on your part, the actual amount of your money locked into EML is now pretty small? I'm certainly not knocking your methods, but I do find it ironic how the 'Lone Wolf' is content to mock and criticise those you designate into, 'the Herd' (i.e. anyone who supports the company, when you don't), but actually you depend upon 'the Herds' to sustain all the various companies that you hope one day to make money from. Otherwise in those long weeks, months or years, as a company strives to progress and grow - the SP doesn't build itself after all, so it's not you who sustains it, and has to bear the risks as they occur. Who holds the shares whilst awaiting studies, licenses, permits and finance to be tackled, then sitting out the delays, rather than running for the hills whenever any dark cloud appears?
Lets face it testpack3, you just don't have the stamina to do the hard yards, or to bear any of the serious risks to build a company. Simply put, If the timetable isn't running to your personal plan, you moan, criticise and then bail, knowing that 'The Herd' will keep things going, until it's safe for you to nip in and stick your snout back in the trough once more. Each to their own, eh?
So in future, just give us your thoughts, but save your charming mix of sneering and condescension, for someone more deserving - like anytime you catch sight of yourself in the mirror.
MrJinx, just to say that I totally agree with your 'Not sure what your point is…!?!?!?' , comment on the (hopefully) final post from bristolblue - who seems determined to spam this BB with a whole cut-and-past collage. Most of which has little or no relevance to discussions here simply because there is no attempt to show why so many other potash producers are being mentioned on this board at this time - no analysis or comparison type information has been provided by bristolblue to make any sense to this series of posts.
And quite what the paragraph, 'The cost of getting everything up together has just doubled. The plant down at the docks has got more expensive and the buying of heavy industry machinery to do the job also has doubled in price', is actually supposed to mean relative to the Khemisset project is a complete mystery?
Certainly we are going to be hit by some effects due to rising inflation, but at a rate of 100% in some unspecified way, and from what starting cost?- really?
As I say MrJinx, Like you, I was totally unimpressed by this sudden (Brain?) Dump onto this BB - I'm guessing that you won't be much interested in wasting your time, but if you have a glance at bristolblue's posts elsewhere, you may find that you have inadvertently broken his duck by actually responding to one here. ;o)
ATB
@chisler
Another one of your lines drawn in the sand I presume?
Sorry chisler, on this occasion your usual fulsome delivery leaves me clueless, as to what point if any, you are actually trying to make - so I'm afraid it's about as much use to me as a chocolate teapot. ;o)
Please don't trouble yourself just on my account. But maybe if you could add a little more detail here, so we can possibly move this guessing game on a step?
Or perhaps I'm completely missing the timing clue, and you are referring to your plans to sell up and depart, and you just want to take this opportunity to say a fond farewell and a few kind words to me before departing?
I bet it surprised you that I guessed quite so quickly, eh? ;o)
@Hodgeyd
You've probably noticed what a nosey bunch we are here, so can I start off with my own personal welcome, assuming that this is your first time here, and then add my question(s) to the list, that you can respond to or ignore, depending on how you feel - and before once again we are swept away in another wave of irrepressible enthusiasm from our resident dynamic duo (Greg25 & mickey1122).
Obviously nothing wrong in that, as I believe that satisfaction levels here are quite buoyant on everything except our current SP, but we all have our own mental roadmap for what is going to cause that to rise - personally I hope everyone is right and we get not just one, but a whole series of growth spurts as each piece of positive news drops on to the pile.
So needless to say, I am personally very curious as to what about Caracal attracted you to part with a fairly serious chunk of change, at this specific time, because regardless of the sterling efforts from Robbie and Jason. Caracal seems to be moving from strength to strength, but still largely unnoticed by the broader gold stock purchasing investors?
I mean something or several something's must have said to you 'Buy Caracal Now'.
Anyway Hodgeyd, unless you are my old mate Paul, who was listening to me expounding the merits of Caracal over a Starbucks the other day, I would be delighted if you could say what clinched it for you?
Either way, GL and ATB
Having listened to the GC interview a number of times now, what comes across IMO is that he is not actually speaking to us shareholders, as we are already fully aware of everything he was stating, but instead with hindsight, it seems more likely to be value signalling aimed at supporting the “Morocco Now", event taking place in London.
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/03/347776/hakim-hajoui-to-uk-investors-morocco-is-a-hub-for-investments-in-africa
What a strange surreal thread, I mean Barravelli, testpack3 and chisler having what seems like a sensible conversation about potash investments, where MrJinx, wanders through making an equally sensible point, that is totally ignored by all, but in the mean time testpack3 pulls a 180 degree turn from previous statements and ends with, 'Better to stick with the Devil we know' - I'm not even sure if surreal begins to describe it ;o)
Still at least chisler was doing his best to rehome Barravelli when he departs at the end of the month, very laudable, but isn't something wrong with this picture? I mean chisler, as you are simultaneously, Dr Chris Gilchrist (he really is "Mr Potash") number one fan and
GC's number one hater. How on earth have you managed to choose the wrong 1Mt/a Potash mining company to invest in? Always assuming that is your primary motive for being here?