The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
" the tribunal decided that discounted cash-flow would be used for the valuation of investment's market value.........citing crystallex v venezuela"
" the tribunal noted that dcf valuation was taken into account by mining bodies....". " the tribunal set a compound interest rate according to international law authorities"
https://www.iisd.org/itn/en/2019/12/17/tribunal-finds-****stan-breached-fet-expropriation-non-impairment-obligations-mining-joint-venture-with-australian-investor-tethyan-copper-company-tethyan-copper-company-v-****stan-icsid-arb-12-1/
game on - as we have mentioned all along
Agree with all here:
The share price, on announcement of the funding, has not really caught up to where it should be - hoping this will change soon
Obviously the share price increase will happen over time and I am hoping will accelerate leading up to the announcement of the quantum of the claim - MB mentions in the interview that we are significantly advanced with our team of specialists advisors.
Currently, without any claim figure, we are obviously not seeing much increase. Ignoring for a moment the size of our asset and the profit which will be forgone if there is no amicable agreement, even if we were to use the same quantum of claim of £740 million or so made by GreenX on their coal assets, our share price has a lot of ground to cover.
GreenX, when it first talked about the claim amount back in September 2020, I believe their share price was around 10p. This has increased 4-5 folds today with the outcome not yet reached. I believe this increase in their share price works to around only 20% of the claim amount. If we were to apply 20% to an equivalent amount of claim of £740 million when announced, we would expect the share price to reflect, over time, an increase in market cap, on an equivalent basis, £148 million OR £148m/154m shares = 96p. Currently, we are at 9p which is 1/10 of what we could achieve on similar basis as GreenX (assume for now over the same period as GreenX) once the claim is announced. If we were to instead be awarded say the full claim equivalent to that submitted by GreenX then you can see where the share price could get to.
We don't know what claim figure MB has in mind. If GreenX have submitted their claim on the basis of the market value of the coal assets and the profit forgone and factoring the time value of money, my estimated workings based on a 25 year project producing 350,000 ounces of gold each year indicates that we could possibly submit a claim in the range of some £1.45 Billion based on 6.7 million ounces with gold market price of £1800 and costs of £800 and an initial outlay of £250 M + interest rate of 10%.
I can't for a moment imagine that the Indian Govt, who recently has been entering into bilateral treaties particularly with Australia on a range of areas covering mining, would allow their image to be tarnished.
I don't think that there will be an agreement soon - certainly not before the next court hearing - I am hoping for the next RNS to say that the parties have started discussions towards that goal.
Hi Mickey and all
Just caught your message - I was going to post but got extremely busy. I will post later tonight or tomorrow morning
Stampee1, I personally would be very happy with that.
Hi Mickey
I should have added that on the flip side, a mere £750 Million POSSIBLE compensation would, over the same time horizon and growing at a rate of 7% would be worth over £4 Billion to PAT and us shareholders
Hello everyone
Apologies only just got free so I thought of doing some quick analysis based on the following assumptions. If we have a corporate finance person amongst us then please could they check this. Alternatively, I know Mark reads our BB so I could check up with him:
(1) I have attempted to see (and I am by no account, unlike Mark, Corporate Finance expert) if the NPV would be beneficial if the Rajasthan Govt did not reach an amicable agreement with us but instead had to fork out a mere £750M (to be conservative) in arbitration and then undertake the project themselves. They would therefore need to borrow, on day one:
a) £750M to be payable to PAT and
b) £250M to undertake the project (I think this is reasonable cost to assume BUT I may be wrong so please correct me if necessary).
(2) Assume the project would take 25 years.
(3) Their initial outlay will therefore be not £250M but £1 BILLION as they need to take into account the compensation payable to PAT.
(4) Assume the first 5 years of the project will have negative cash flows as they need to borrow £1Billion. Assume the interest rate for the borrowing is 10% to reflect the inherent risk. Therefore, they will have negative -100Million cash outflow each year for the first 5 years and no positive cash inflow.
(5) Assume they start mining from year 6 and sell what they produce - assume they produce 350,000 ounces per year from year 6 to year 25. [That is 7 million ounces in total ]. Also assume they make £1000 profit per ounce (£1800 selling price less £800 costs). So they will make £350Million of cash flow each year from year 6 to year 20 inclusive. [This will produce positive cash flow of £7 Billion over the 20 year period. ] (i.e. 350,000 ounces x £1000 x 20 years).
(6) However, they need to service the loan interest each year at 10% on the £1Billion = £100Million.
(7) Therefore, from year 6 to year 25 inclusive, they will have NET cashflow positive of £250 Million (i.e. £350Million less interest costs of £100 Million).
(8) The above cashflows from year 1 to year 25, discounted at the rate of 10% will PRODUCE A NEGATIVE NPV OF -£57.5 MILLION FOR THE RAJASTHAN GOVT.
(9) Over the life of the project, although a net cashflow of £3.5 Billion (UNDISCOUNTED) is produced [i.e. -£(100 Million) for the first 5 years, followed by +£250 Million for the years 6 to 20 and finally repaying the borrowed sum of £-1 Billion at year 25 ], when these are discounted to present value at 10%, the project IS NOT WORTH FOR THEM TO UNDERTAKE DUE TO THE FRONT LOADED COST OF £1BILLION.
(10) If the above holds true, it will be in the best interests of the Rajasthan Govt to reach an amicable agreement with PAT.
Good Luck All
Deffo
Thank you for raising the issue
It's a no brainer here - simply accumulate and sit back for the news to come soon
This work continues to confirm our belief that the geology of the Erongo region, plays host to a burgeoning critical metals province in Namibia. As we increase and diversify production at Uis, we are also striving to discover and define additional tech-metals resources with the potential to develop into standalone operations."
Mark wants to develop the mine in conjunction with the JV partner - negotiations with the potential JV are at a very advanced stage.
The plan is to announce the JV partner at the same time any deal with the govt of Rajasthan is announced.
The last time I spoke with Mark, he was in Singapore and you can guess where!!!!.
Could not resist re-reading the RNS again = this is so so mega for PAT and things are going to change for good from hereon for PAT and all us.
We now have an upper hand as the Team is firm in their belief we will get market value award at the arbitration. This will be reflected in the coming days. The Rajasthan govt treated us like dirt for all these years having deliberately embezzled our world class asset.
This has now come back to haunt them forever for not playing fairly by the rules.
Hi Edhellas
No worries at all. All good points.
Welcome Shearclass and good post.
Scene already now set for the next stage. I still believe with the ultimate aim still of reaching some kind of agreement- EVEN IF IT'S PARTIAL IN MY VIEW (POTENTIAL JV) but without any govt stake in it.
I think MB must be very busy today doing interviews - so hopefully expect a video interview on Proactive later today!!!!!
As I posted the extract from one of the judgements some while back, the Rajasthan Govt wants 51% control of the project. This MB will not give due to the confidence in achieving the result in our favour.
"In addition to working with Fasken, IGPL has used this period to select several leading investment treaty law and mining industry advisors and experts to assist in the arbitration. The increased Facility ensures that IGPL has the necessary resources to fully - and successfully - prosecute the merits of its claims under the Treaty."
Ejt7777, absolutely in my view.
MB has always leaned towards an amicable agreement and I believe will continue to do so until the next hearing. There is every likelihood of an agreement before then. If the Rajasthan Gove continues to frustrate our right beyond that point then I think the Notice will be served to them.
Indeed F1Driver
The Rajasthan Govt gets only 2 WEEKS to make their minds up and discuss at an Indian Govt level. Will the Indian Govt clip Rajasthan Govt ears? - We will surely know after the 9th.
The utmost priority was to secure the LCM funding - WITH A NEW CLAUSE inserted regarding an earlier agreement with the Govt of Rajasthan.
It is a huge risk for the Rajasthan govt to take in the international tribunal. Will the Rajasthan State be allowed to effectively take India to International Court? Faskans are very confident of a positive result.
What we will see now, I believe, is that now that the funding is in place, there will be a round of talks taking place between the parties - there is a whole team of advisers behind PAT in preparation for this.