Member Info for PuzzledPete

Either his bank, or his missus, has foreclosed on his massive debt. More likely his missus.

It will be the same for the remaining rampers. Maybe not immediately while they pile in again just yards from the cliff edge. But soon when a desperate PK tries, unsuccessfully, to bridge the gap from his back-fired warrants wheeze.

At end June Mast had £0.24 million cash, against £2.9 million current liabilities. Plus £2.4 million other debts due within one year, plus £2.1 million owed on Pyebridge. Half year overheads were £0.5 million, and cost of gas and cash operating costs on Pyebridge revenue had been 74%. on £727,000 electricity sales.

Since then all the pre-paid warrants £5 million cash has been received, less £2.4 million 'costs', and as of Dec 2nd, 14.7 million of the cash warrants had been converted, producing another £587,000 cash.

So all in all since June, Mast has received £3.2m cash to add to the £0.24 million it had then, against the £2.9 million short term debts it had in June plus another £2.4million due within one year.

As for income from Pyebridge, Mast won't have received any (although Krugel might pretend it has)

Based on its latest results Pyebridge might produce £850,000 revenue in H2 and £220,000 profit to add to its £727,000 H1 revenue. Krugel never tells you that profit is only some 27% of revenue, so for 2025 Pyebridge might show around £450,000 net profit. If Krugel says that 'revenue' has paid off some of Pyebridge's debt, it wiill only be because it hasn't yet paid its enormous gas bill

But at end June Pyebridge owed £2.1 million to Riverfort repayable by 2029, or over £500,000 pa. So Riverfort will take all or more of whatever profit Pyebridge has made, and Mast will get nothing. Pyebridge is separate, and can't transfer cash to Mast.

So with around £400,000 2H overheads and no income except the £3.2m from warrants, Mast at end Dec will have only reduced its £5.3million one year debt as at end June, by a mere £2.8 million and will still owe around a net £2.5 million.

So Mast has no cash for any further investment, and is still insolvent unless a lot more cash warrants have been taken up since the Dec 2nd figure I've used. To clear that £2.5 million needs another 62.5 million shares added to the 138 million at Dec 2nd, to over £200 million, meaning assets per share will be less than 1p.

Those numbers are based on Mast's own and don't lie.

Far from having £10 million cash to 'further its plans' Mast is still insolvent. Only if another 200 million cash warrants are taken up, will it have a small amount of cash to do so - by which time assets per share will be even lower, and Mast still won't be getting any significant income from its plants until they pay off their own loans in some eight years time.

What £10 m in the coffers would that be Mr Neverquite Maidit ?

Companies don't 'sponsor' rampers BD. Reputable Companies at least, and Kefi with institutional investors would be considered reputable. (I CAN point to some disreputable companies who can be proved to be doing it though)

Can't really expect a new bidder to emerge, surely. The board's reasons for accepting seem damning. Uncertainty re further funding. How can any bidder, who hasn't already seen the data room, take the risk ? Surely, though, we should at least be shown what the outstanding feasibility study is trending towards. One assumes BHP NEM etc have seen it. The Chinese almost certainly have.

So what revenue will that be Mr NoCanDo ? Have you worked out the important thing. What PROFIT will be made. And who will get it ? No. Of course you haven't. (Hint, its been posted here in detail, with all the evidence, but it seems you haven't been able to read. let alone understand. ) (Further hint. It goes to Pyebridge, not to Mast. Even further hint.. Pyebridge is a separate company 75% owned by Powertree, or didn't you know ?)(Yet another hint. Pyebridge owes £4.5 million to powertree which has to be repaid before Mast gets even its 25% of what's left. Or didn't you know ?) No of course you didn't.

So who do you think is the saddest little ignorant nobody here ?

NAV or NPV can never be the amount a buyer should pay. For a start he will need to deduct his buying price. For another the NPV is only 'worth' what it is to the 'owner' at his own cost of capital. A buyer will use his own cost of capital. For an industry buyer, he will also consider how the acquisition fits into his own availability of management resource and necessity to satisfy his own shareholders (if he has any) and his own long term plans which might be more or less urgent than the sellers'. For a shareholder if any, he will take account of his own required return on investment which will almost certainly be considerably higher than for an industry buyer, lessening the price he should pay.

What we don't know here is the updated Cascabel NPV and Capex and I find it odd that Solg appears to be 'forgetting' to publish it. Maybe it would be too disappointing.

Re Lassonde Curve. Sorry I should have been more precise. As is logical, the market valuation will relate to the amount raised and spent so far and will increase as production nears..

The Lassonde Curve doesn't relate to a company's share price. It relates to its enterprise value - ie as is logical, it relates to the total spent so far on its project.

Mr Maidit. The state of Mast's balance sheet and thus its insolvency has been explained on here many, many times, together will all the published evidence for it. What is the matter with you ? Not that it isn't obvious. It seems you have never achieved the ability to read or understand. So why are you here ?

Surely his buying $1 million before putting out his excitable podcast and before any definitive RNS, was clear insider dealing?

His excitability was one reason I didn't take much notice of him. I've seen quite a few streamers come and go over the years, and not all of them found things rosy. The last one to be taken out for well below 'assets' was Trident earlier this year, having put a lot of its eggs in the then not to be missed lithium basket. Gray seems to be putting all his in gold. Yet some are muttering that gold is due for quite a bit of correction.

In mining, its usually been right to be cautious. especially in the middle of what has the hallmarks of a bubbly boom.

To continue - interrupted by LSE's wonky IT

--"out of revenues will have to be paid 1) the cost of gas usually 70% of revenue and 2) operating and maintenance costs usually another 3-4%, (not to mention depreciation around another ) and 3) out of what's left Pyebridge will have to pay off its approx £2 million debt to Riverfort. (Working out the maths means nothing much over to pay anything to help Mast;s insolvency.

But to further confuse Maidit's already confused brain, PK will make out, as he did earlier this year, that 'all the revenue' will come to Mast and will be enough to pay off the debt. He will also say that (because he might have held on to some of the revenue before paying the gas man) he is not, at this precise moment, insolvent. (and won't say that once he's paid the gas bill he will be)

can someone used to dealing with the ******ed try to point out to mr never quite maidit that pk might trumpet revenues. but he won't tell you that they belong to the legally separate pyebridge and not to mast, and out of revenues will have to be paid 1) the cost of gas usually 70% of revenue and 20)

"Completion of this funding remains subject to detailed documentation being agreed with the provider and approved by the Project's senior lenders"

Well Now ! Didn't I say this would be necessary ?

Yes I've just listened. But the question remains. How is this going to go down with the other funders ? Gray's excitement is for the fantastic return he's going to get. The other side of the coin is it eats into the return the other funders might have been counting on. Don't forget that major holders usually oppose such deals for that very reason. eg Franco Nevada's deal for Solgold was violently opposed by BHP and NCM even though it looks less damaging to the NPV than maybe this one. (haven''t worked it out yet) Its possible after all to estimate the PV of the stream Gray will be getting. That comes off the PV part of the NPV sums. No doubt we'll see soon.

Maybe slight caution is warranted. Am I right thinking its only TW who has gone out on a limb and said its a done deal ? He also said Harry hasn't mentioned it. He can't if no deal has been signed yet. And if its true that Chancery only went to 'learn about' Tulu Kepi a week or so ago, that's been no time for the rest of the board to go through all the necessary due diligence before agreeing let alone signing a deal, not to mention that the other equity and loan providers might be entitled to see it - especially as the deal that has been suggested, I must say, I've rarely seen before. To take all the amount streamed from the start, rather than in stages, is adding risk, no matter how small, to the others. But without any definite deal and all the terms, it seems we are all merely speculating. If there's an announcement next few days all well and good. But I can't see anything happening within weeks at least.

Sounds good if such a deal closes the equity funding gap. However they they tend to be much more expensive than bank loans for the producer. And I doubt whether 'one week' is enough for the due diligence that, surely, the other directors in Chancery will need to sign off a deal. One wonders why - Chancery hadn't heard of Tulu Kepi before ? and why Harry has had to resort to what is always a slight sign of desperation. Depends on the terms of course, but unlike other forms of equity, a 'streaming' deal takes away part of the the income for 'all' other participants. Again, depending on the terms, they might have something to say about it. Hope not because I'm invested here too.

What 'overhang' would that be ? Or are you referring to the 1 bn shares that will permanently 'overhang' the value of these shares ?

Just looking in. So they're still at it. Don't want to know the facts, or what they mean. Just want to 'filter' anything might make them think, 'Think' ? Oh Dear.

If you four, none of whom seems to have done any research on this company, or know much about shares, bothered to read back far enough you would get your answers.