George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Before getting too excited, I respectfully suggest you check in on the ARCM board, and view the comments of it's shareholders in respect of NHS.
Far better to ignore the rampers, who have spent years predicting 10p -20p +, has not happened to date, and is unlikely to any time soon.
It will take in excess of 12 months to carry out a meaningful assessment of any identified target areas, and even with positive drill results, it would take years to monetise any discovery. In the meantime, the BOD will be beavering away, making themselves look busy in order to justify their unjustifiable salaries, and further destroying shareholder value.
@ HarChris 08:35.
Really? Prior to the surrender of their options, the PDMR's 'interests' were pretty much aligned with their shareholders, yet, despite being involved in sensitive negotiations, they were able to take advantage of the inflated share price, cash in without parting with a single penny of their own money, breaking that alignment in the process. What makes you think that will not happen again?
Step forward all those who said there would be NO placing.
This is necessary to keep the lights on, and pay the salaries. Things could have been so different if they had sold the Tingo shares when they received them.
Over 40 years of Investing across all the UK stock markets, has shown me that anybody invested in a company, should care about such things.
Without the facts, how else are we to judge the performance of those acquisition's, and the people who
made them?
That's not a very good look, a company stating they will never disclose (to their owners), how much they paid? I should imagine that would create a few problems for the auditors, and should DEFINITELY raise concerns from shareholders, who are surely entitled to know how, and where, their money is being spent.
@ Major Tom
Given the surrender of their share options, and events since then, (silence on Twingo, issue of shares to pay creditors, paying down the options surrender debt using cash rather than shares, issue of options to another employe), do you really need to ask that last question?
The balance of monies owed in respect of the options surrender is due and payable in March. Whilst the board have the option to settle the debt using equity, rather than cash, that is not the route it has chosen thus far.
My guess is that a placing is on the cards.
@Lantier.
It's a serious question. The company needs to explain why, in order to conserve funds, it delayed the assays on the Botswana cores. When Arcm announced the completion of the Casa sale, they boasted about the value of the Tingo shares Arcm received in payment. Tingo was a non core asset, worth more than it cost, a supposedly saleable asset that could, and should have been sold off, so why wasn't it?
Why delay the assays, the result of which, if positive, could have boosted the share price and benefitted ALL the shareholders?
Furthermore, how come the board decided to pay down the debt owed to the directors in respect of their options surrender, using cash, rather than shares, which they had the option to do, thus 'conserving' cash, or was cash conservation NOT an issue then?
Given the financial position of the company, and the actions taken to conserve funds, shareholders are surely entitled to an explanation as to why the Tingo share holding was apparently not sold off, or even reduced, in order to raise funds.
Strange then, that none of the ongoing issues at the time, prevented the directors from taking advantage of the raised share price at the time, and being paid to surrender options.
That action ONLY benefitted 5 directors, at the expense of every shareholder.
Contrary to the claim that those directors HAD to surrender those options, refer back to the RNS dated 16th March 2021. Straight from the horses mouth, the decision was entirely in house, and despite the reason given, the company went in to issue more shares, AND hand out further options to a staff member, and also as part of the cost to settle legal claims against the company.