Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
As mentioned yesterday Ben, 51.5% of MUST shares in the hands of Acacia, chairman and MD. That tells me if there is a plan for RTO that those three agree with, then it will go straight through as far as the shareholder vote is concerned.
Can potentially overthink also. If the sp keeps on recovering and big sells stop, then we are back to it potentially just one or two larger holders disappearing. Interesting weeks and months ahead no doubt. Will leave you guys to it.
Uksteveg, I marked as contentious, as I have it under a question "is forward-selling possible?". You see it discussed sometimes, but I really don't know. If it is possible, then it would potentially lead to the kind trades, sp drop and discomfort we have experienced below 10p. But it could also be viewed more positively as more 'done and dusted' on formal announcement of cash being available for a buyout.
As I say, the whole idea could be wrong and it's just too much selling in the current market, or parts could be correct but could happen by another mechanism or further in the future. Nonetheless, I'm personally increasingly suspecting method in the apparent madness.
An expanded hypothesis (that's all, do not use for decisions). Thinking further about fatbanker’s posting a few weeks ago, and price action.
MUST is anticipating relisting soon (?July) – a prospectus & other documents are already with the FCA. On suspension the MUST mcap was £3M (a peak value). The majority of shares (51.5% from the MUST website) are held between Acacia Resources (also a major BMN shareholder), the NE Chairman and the MD. A buyout of and RTO into MUST could be feasible, sooner rather than later – enabling BMN into the main London market, and also JSE dual-listing.
Cash would be needed – some millions, but not lots of millions, to give value to MUST shareholders/team, and for the costs of listing changes. A guess, but maybe 4-6% BMN dilution, at around current sp? BMN already has cash and may well have additional profits not yet reported, but that money being earmarked for the main aspects of the business and expansion, not for AIM-exit.
Now (contentious part), perhaps money has already effectively been raised over recent weeks partially or completely and is responsible for the more recent drop down from 10p. That would fit with others’ hypotheses that Duferco are either completely out, or have some shares left but haven’t been selling <10p. Then you look at the big sells, and probably lots of smaller ones since the sp went below 10p, tot those up and consider – could a few million £ already be effectively ‘in the bag’ and ready to go to make an offer on MUST next month? The shares attached to that money now effectively being in the hands of the people who have been buying sub 10p. To emphasise, I have no idea if this could be correct, just mulling it as a possibility.
Now (good part), this hypothesis would mean we would get what comes with MUST purchase, and the main London market listing + JSE. We would have the benefits of the new listings and new broker (Cellcube, North American profile etc.). Then consider it may coincide with an upturn in comms and positive news that seems to have been lacking, high volumes, ii buying, no more big sellers, the single penny shares gone fast, re-rate to levels where we had been hoping and expecting. It also supports the ideas that JSE investors can get a (brief) opportunity for a low entry point, and that Acacia are not holding 45M BMN shares expecting the sp to be staying down here.
Just a hypothesis.
The broker that's gone (Peel Hunt, offices in London and New York) had a target on 27/10/21 of 27p - modest compared to some of the earlier targets from both brokers (e.g. 45p, 80p). Accepting they are going to be inclined to positivity. It does feel that the new broker could bring significant additional positives beyond setting a target.
More from the BOD to support the sp, or at least minimise the possibility self-induced impact, unless the gain is absolutely clear and timely. Reinvest any profits from current progress, where possible. One or two positive things seen (e.g. some of the Duferco deal at least was paid in cash) gives some encouragement that the sp is not off the radar in decisions. Again, more clarity where possible.
Tuning out until next news.
jonny_five - well spotted re the duplication - This is Money - original dating 6th June, updated 9th June. So not new information today. I expect that any formal legal action would have to have been RNS~ed, so seems unlikely to be in progress anyway. I'm thinking that there are still discussions going on - and not officially price-sensitive at this stage, but perhaps viewed as too sensitive in other ways to air in public. If it is just a known government/GSMB process delay e.g. waiting for other government reports, committee meetings to be held etc, then imo they should RNS those details asap, unless the IML sign-off and RNS really is "imminent" anyway.
pb940, I would guess that this has been lined up/planned for a while, since the previous second brokers were disengaged in December, or fairly soon thereafter. On the output, 2800 + 2600 = 5400 is my understanding? And:
"Bushveld Vanadium is targeting to materially grow its vanadium production and achieve an annualised steady state production run rate of between 5,000 mtVp.a. and 5,400 mtVp.a by the end of 2022, from projects currently being implemented. Beyond that, pre-feasibility studies are in progress to determine the optimal path to increase production even further to a steady state production run rate of between 6,400 mtVp.a. and 6,800 mtVp.a. in the medium-term and to a steady state production run rate of 8,400 mtVp.a in the long term".
Short term: Q2/H1 2022 operational update expected second half of July Unaudited cash and cash equivalents of US$12.7 million as at 31 March 2022. A test to see if that will that be up or down and by how much (lag on the previous period of high V prices versus lower more recently, smoother running in company versus logistical issues getting to market)? Better to be up ofc.
Longer term. The RNS from yesterday generates more questions than answers, and generally the market likes the latter. I would argue that whatever is planned first generates a mechanism to stimulate interest in the company and sp. i.e. new listing(s) first if planned, projected profits for H2 onwards and any other positive progress made clear to the market, before considering pushing for the 8400. I don't see this as being for a buyout, though who knows?
And, in passing, people have said before, but get rid of this: https://www.gem.wiki/Imaloto_Coal_power_station
There seems to have been little officially said about it for a year or two.
Hoping for a bit more clarity from the company soon, and supporting of their existing shareholders
Just personal thoughts.
In total agreement. The last interview questions were more challenging than those from Proactive, and the answers given on both the IML and off-take certainly felt 'cagy'. The market doesn't like caginess and opaqueness. I hope the company can release something official, and more market-reassuring early next week. I don't think leaving the available information as it is for weeks to come is tenable.
The struggling state of the wider small-miner market could be both negative and positive. Effectively being in 'mothballs' has not made that much difference to the sp, compared with some others that have been actively trying to keep their business progressing through the downturn with lots of spending. The positive is that an opportunity e.g. investment in another company, or JV(?), could be potentially be picked up at a low price. Rose-tinted spectacles perhaps.
But wanting to see something positive from the company asap, just like other shareholders here.
RNS Number : 8848S
19 November 2021
Ormonde Mining plc
Ormonde announces that the Directors of the Company have, for the time being, elected to waive their entitlement to directors' fees and to grant share options to certain directors and employees in accordance with the rules of Ormonde's Share Option Plan, which was approved by shareholders on 27 September 2018. The decision on Directors' fees will be reviewed in line with future developments in the Company's strategy.
Accordingly, on 18 November 2021, the Company granted share options ("Options") over 9,150,000 ordinary shares in the capital of the Company ("Ordinary Shares") to directors and employees of the Company. The exercise price for each option is Euro 0.011, this being a premium of 10% over the closing share price of an Ordinary Share on the Euronext Growth Market of Euronext Dublin on the day prior to award of the Options, being 17 November 2021. The Options have a 10-year duration and will vest in two equal instalments, on issuance, and on the first anniversary of that date.
Fosters - I think the 23p mini-peak (11/1/21), was likely a combination of factors:
1) Golden Summit finishing their selling - this is speculation as they went below reporting threshold on 11/9/20. However, at that timepoint (when the sp was 13.5p) they had sold ~30M, and had ~34M shares left. It's entirely conceivable that they sold the remainder between Sept-Dec 2020.
2) Positive newsflow - The Orion financing deal went through Sept-Nov 2020, and there were RNS's about improved output and about the the Vametco minigrid
3) The first tranch of Duferco shares were admitted for trading (obtained @ 12.97p, a 5% discount from 13.65p) on 24/12/20 when the sp had reached 19.25p
18 days later the sp peaked at 23p and began to decline. It's not known when Duferco began selling their first tranch of shares, as I don't think the first tranch (37M) crossed the reporting threshold. No doubt some PIs sold at 23p.
It still looks like targeted sells are being dripped in - from what source at this stage seems uncertain. The lesson now is the same imo - when the excess selling stops, and better newsflow comes, the sp should rise.
The independent IHC mining study figures could fit with potentially multiples of 12p, even with possible significant dilution. On the 'sell after IML' conjecture, accepting it's unlikely to happen in reality... considering the current mcap at 6.35p is $15m. Say, sell for ~4x current sp (25.4p) = $60m + new owner spends the $37m capex = $97m cost for 10 years' projected $262m net profit, more +/- longer with the proven resource expanded. On paper at least, not necessarily unattractive when 'tricky' local ground-work has been done. Who can say who might be interested. But I am assuming the the BoD (and presumably bulk shareholders) would believe that 25.4p will be too cheap post-IML.
Can't find any new clues re the IML. Possible scenarios in my mind are still:
- Usual bureaucracy - they're just getting around to signing it off anytime now
- It has been put on hold until the National Policy on Mineral Resources is complete (~End September target)
- Some other delay from the key pen-holders
I'm sure the original intention here was -> good progress -> increase sp -> stronger position for financial negotiations. Unfortunately, the reverse has happened. I didn't particularly like the talk of further 'investors' - not seeing it as likely to be great for those of us already with ~20-50% devalued shares, but not looking to buy any more.
As hinted previously, I do wonder about getting the IML (+ info from additional proving up of the resource) then selling the company (for say 3-4 x current sp) to someone with bigger pockets for whom the capex is less of an issue. Anyway, I've been here from PAL times, and can wait another couple of years if needed, so would not be abandoning ship at a loss.
"Enviable position"? - it's a stretch, but cash in the bank, some assets, an AIM listing
What planet are these guys on? Earth?
£3.2 million market cap - it's easier to multiply small numbers than large ones
Share price at lowest point in 2 years - par for the course in this sector at the moment
No projects - clearly stated they are assessing new projects, we wait to see
No newsflow - true, but news will be reported when it's worth reporting
No management team - untrue
Why is this even allowed to trade more than 2 years after selling its main asset? Because of the above.