Member Info for PerArduaAdAstra

“There should be a death penalty for shorting. That should prevent it and sort the issue.”
——-
Meanwhile, the largest chunk of financing to get this project up and running (via the ST1 $400mn convertible bond issue), would have come from where?

And do we shoot those who are hedging their positions? The book runners? Or, Chris Fraser for soliciting their funding to start with?

per ardua ad astra

Spot on, casapinos. I completely agree.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Good morning, Dave. Fwliw, I pretty much agree with what you say. Perhaps the only difference surrounding the finalising of the budget. Of course none of us are privy to discussions, however, I’m inclined toward thinking that whilst procurement (with STRABAG having their say) is a major factor, the 06th Sept. RNS did also cite “risk allocation” and the key driver behind that would have been the financiers. Their deep pockets affords them the luxury to be a greedy and needy so and so. The needy part obvious in the reduction of risk. Of course one of the key aspects of the risk mitigation in this project is the IPA guarantee, as such, is it not reasonable to surmise that if obvious and perhaps unequivocal support were more apparent, the money men may not have been so quick to mitigate some of that perceived risk by front loading the MTS costing with STRABAG taking on more of it — for a price.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“could you relay what the soundings have been please as I have missed them”
——
Would that I could, Roulette. That’s the very point I am making. We’ve not heard anything from IPA since prequalification - and that was three ago. No doubt there will be myriad factors to tie together, however (and perhaps I’m being overly wishful), it would no doubt have been helpful to our cause if we had heard something more from them.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

With trillions - rather than billions - at their disposal, no doubt Hammond is hoping that pension funds will take up the slack that govt. are responsible for. You’d have hoped with an open goal in front of them, and only a small proportion of funds available already allocated, the IPA would be making life considerably easier for a transformative business like Sirius by stepping up and addressing outstanding concerns with our guarantee. Perhaps “collaborating with other government functions to provide central support to EU Exit related projects” has caused them to take their collective eye off the ball.

Positive soundings and briefings from IPA concerning their desire in - and working for - the success of this project may have arrested some of the slide we have seen in recent weeks.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Hello, Roulette. It’s hard, and perhaps a tad harsh to describe it as a leak - unless the information is coming from within the company. The fact is they will be meeting with an array of institutions as they pursue their options and those institutions will undoubtedly have more than one or two people involved in discussions.

Frustrating of course, but hey, not much we can do about it I’m sorry to say. And of course I might be entirely wrong - it’s only a view after all.

per ardua ad astra

Good morning, deep joy. Fear and greed will always have their part to play. Right now the market would APPEAR to be giving some indication of a price the company MAY be looking for additional funding at though.

N.B. ‘Appear’and ‘may’ are capitalised before some twerp pitches up with “you have no material evidence whatsoever for that assertion“.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Hiya, Scotty. Yeah, of course I do. Otherwise I’d have sold up and moved on. This venture has too much going for it not to get the backing it needs, however, I will admit to more than a little dismay at the price we now find ourselves at, the far from opaque reason behind it, and the inevitable consequence of the situation we expect will more than likely follow.

Fred - the only difference between you and the originator is that you’ve googled after reading it, whereas he googled potential synonyms before typing them. How else to explain the more than frequent, inappropriate and contextually inaccurate usage? Fulminating and entropy being the most recent examples. 😂

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“For me, the share price right now does not shadow the efforts, capabilities or achievements of the company”
——
Good morning, Mr.dt. Notwithstanding the significant progress we have seen on the ground at Woodsmith and elsewhere, for me the share price right now would certainly appear to reflect Chris’ apparent ability to raise significant levels of finance at a price that is anything other than costly.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Yes, Chesh. Order book trading is done as you say through Direct Market Access (DMA). That’s not to say HL don’t use DMA (undoubtedly they will), however, when you buy shares through a broker, they either source the shares through an MM (WINS, CENK, CANA etc) or, they can fulfill the trade through their own account. There are rules governing how this is done with the separation of functions within a business of course, however, O trades are never from the order book directly - there is always at least one degree of separation, and quite possibly one or two more.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Hiya, Chesh. It’s only a buy AND a sell when it’s an A trade, remember. If it’s an O trade (or variation there of) it is either a buy OR a sell because the other party to the transaction is an MM who is considered a part of the ‘system’ rather than a true buyer or seller.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Good afternoon, canetois. Oh, I don’t know... the price has gone up slightly since that buy, lol. Seriously though, the problem we are experiencing was always anticipated in that until all the convertibles cleared, there was inevitably going to be something of an anchor on price owing to the ready availability of shares. Of course we didn’t know, though, that there would be a delay in ST2 being announced and the further need for additional funding - something that without, would find us all feeling rather more comfortable waiting things out in the mid-thirties rather than, mid-twenties. Ho hum.

As for any buy/sell data, is determining such that important anyway? The tale of the tape is invariably in the price, and other than providing an something of an additional selling point for L2 providers, buy/sell information is easily gerrymandered or manipulated to suit whatever impression it is some participants wish to convey.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

Set against the price action around it, it certainly looks like a buy to me. £175k that should see an excellent return over the next few months. Would that my last buy was of a comparable size!

Cheers,

pera ardua ad astra

“everything looks on plan including stage two funding which again is looking like all debt as CF has hinted at all along.”
——-
Whilst it may be harsh to condemn your enthusiasm and belief, Alan, I really cannot see how you can accurately assert that “everything looks on plan” and “looking like all debt”. It is hopeful thinking and I share in your high hopes, however, the fact remains that (a) everything isn’t on plan; because if it were ST2 would be rolled out any day now rather than being pushed back to Q1/19 and, (b) you simply cannot say it is ‘looking like all debt’ when at this moment we simply don’t know how the additional funding will come about or be structured. What we do know (because we’ve been told) is we will not be looking to increase senior debt so, that only leaves the other debt option of subordinated (or mezzanine) debt which will naturally be more expensive. Given the choice of that or any combination of the other options available (completion bond, partner/royalty deal or dilution) I will take the mezz. debt every time though. That is not to say it is in any way certain - no matter how much we may wish it. To describe anything at this stage as ‘looking like’ is somewhat disingenuous, certainly premature and possibly misleading.

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

...and many here undoubtedly think likewise. ‘Tis a pity then, how often people perpetuate negative thread titles - even more so when you appreciate the instigator has no aversion to creating a new one themselves.

per ardua ad astra

Another ex Fortescue exec is making a play in potash. The idea that potash will be in demand for years to come would appear to be something of a common currency - I wonder if Tony has been chatting to any of our guys?

“Highly regarded mining executive Tony Swiericzuk appointed as Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Salt Lake Potash.

Mr Swiericzuk recently spent 9 years with Fortescue Metals Group (FMG), including as Director Business Development and Exploration, General Manager Christmas Creek Mine and General Manager Port.”

More here:

http://www.investegate.co.uk/salt-lake-potash-ltd--so4-/rns/appointment-of-managing-director---ceo/201810220700076824E/

Regards,

per ardua ad astra

You toss a coin or go with your gut by all means, Nokesa. Though it’s hard to credibly claim to be looking at the ‘bigger picture’ when you post about a company’s share price within 30 minutes of market opening each of the last three days.

For my part, I am neither a hairy arsed engineer, a finance manager or a company employee for that matter. I did, however, spend much time researching this company many moons ago - and have kept abreast of developments since. Yet by far and away, the single most important thing I’ve done - bar none - is chew the cud with and look our CEO and Chairman in the eye. An appreciation for just who it is we have driving this project has afforded me far more confidence in my investment than any number of hours I could ever spend researching.

All that matters right now is whether you believe our directors will get ST2 over the line. That is the key driver for price right now, and many in the market appear to have reservations - otherwise we wouldn’t be able to pick up shares for 25p but, of course, it’s also highly likely the overwhelming majority will never have sat down for a beer with Chris or Scrimmy and heard their thoughts first hand.

For me, it made all the difference.

per ardua ad astra

With you there - and in the same order, Cranleigh. Subordinated debt is most preferable as I’m guessing that it could potentially work out cheaper. And the completion bond whilst possibly with a hefty premium, will always be better than yet further dilution.

No. More. Dilution!

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

“No idea why - can't see any big sales to justify a drop or anything else”
——-
You don’t need any big sells for a drop in price, John. They merely act as a more perceptible proxy for all that really matters to see the price fall — and that is that there were simply more shares for sale at 25p today than there were buyers.

And with less than a quarter of a percent of shares traded, it doesn’t amount to any great shakes really. We know that buyers will return at some point - we’re just waiting for Chris and Thomas to give them a reason to. And they will.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra

New to me, Myo. Pretty certain one of us here would have happened upon it already if less than a few days old. And whilst - at first view - there doesn’t seem to be too much to glean from it, it is handy to have the blend data used in conjunction with Poly4 rather than straight K.

Cheers,

per ardua ad astra