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.
Pecten11 - 6.29am post
"On the subject of new shares, anybody know how much headroom is left ?"
Hi Pecten11
It does appear that the company has had a seemingly endless supply of 'headroom shares' available to it over the past year.
You maybe interested by the link below.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.twobirds.com/~/media/pdfs/in-focus/coronavirus/cash-box-structure-back-in-fashion-in-the-wake-of-covid19.pdf%3Fla%3Den%26hash%3D89CAA4374F37DF321CF3133F926579D2492BE915&ved=2ahUKEwiYuaS_n7zuAhVQQkEAHTDsDCwQFjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw0Q_lDP02_HsPYLg6Bq5aWH
The Pre Emotion Group (PEG) originally recommended this relaxation of the rules on the 1st of April 2020 as a temporary measure, which was then endorsed by the FCA on the 8th April 2020.
On the 4th September PEG then extended its recommendation until the 30th Nov 2020. And I've read somewhere PEG have again extended their recommendation up to 30th March 2021, given the recent coronavirus situation.
31st Jan 2020 - Atlas drawdown
26th Mar 2020 - 1st Uk lockdown
31st Mar 2020 - ISE Bond admission
1st Apr 2020 - 1st PEG recommendation
17th Apr 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
18th May 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
22nd Jun 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
4th Sept 2020 - PEG extention
10th Sep 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
26th Oct 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
9th Dec 2020 - 2 Tranche placing
If a 'Cash box structure' is indeed the companies chosen method of raising cash, then headroom/shareholder approval effectively become irrelevant, if my interpretation is correct
I also recall, you putting a question to the board twice last year, that I believe has still not been answered in any way.................that being (and in short) why have all the recent placings been admitted to trading on AIM in two seperate traches?
These '2 Tranche' placings seem to have coincided with the arrival of Coronavirus.
They also appear to have fallen in line with the first PEG recommendation, with no '2 tranche' placing occurring before that date, If you refer to the above timeline.
Although this is not an answer to your question, maybe this 'cashbox' structure, given a little research, might answer it?
As a theory.........I wonder if the 17 day gap between PEG's first recommendation, and the first '2 tranche' placing on the 17th of April, was the time required in order to allow the company to create a jersey registered subsidiary (SPV) to exploit the 'cashbox' structure?
PEG Extention (Nov)
https://www.mondaq.com/jersey/operational-impacts-and-strategy/1004788/lockdown-20-update-on-jersey-cash-box-structures
Starvest :
"The assumption is that picture reprsents the volume loaded but more could have been loaded taking the container to 50 or even 80%"
No more copper concentrate will have been added after that photo, as this would certainly exceed the payload limit, in both your 50%, and 80% scenarios.
I will use your 50% scenario to show you why this cannot be the case.
If 50% of the volume of the container was filled with copper concentrate, then the concentrate would occupy 16.6m3.
V(concentrate) = V(Container) / 2
V(concentrate) = 33.2m3 / 2
V(concentrate) = 16.6m3
Of that 16.6m3 of copper concentrate, 30% of it will be pure copper, which would have a volume of 4.98m3.
V(cop) = (V(concentrate) / 100) x 30
V(cop) = (16.6m3 / 100) x 30
V(cop) = 0.166 x 30
V(cop) = 4.98m3
This volume of pure copper alone, given a density of 8940kg/m3 would equate to a mass of 44,521kg
M(cop) = D(cop) x V(cop)
M(cop) = 8940kg x 4.98m3
M(cop) = 44,521kg
The weight of copper alone in your 50% scenario would far exceed the payload limit of the container, and doesn't even include the 70% 'waste. And therefore, no more concentrate would have been added after the photo was taken.
The same can be said for your 80% scenario, where the mass of the pure copper alone would have been 71,233.92kg, again exceeding the payload limit of the container.
Looking at it another way, if the volume of the copper concentrate were to have the volumes you suggest, and were kept within the payload limit of the container, then that will only reduce the average density of the concentrate, resulting in a much lower copper content then my original calculations.
"Also another issue I have with calculation is density of other material as it would mostly be iron/sulphides"
I did state that I made an assumption that the 70% "waste' in the concentrate had a density of 2500kg/m3. This was one of the variables I mentioned.
Regardless of this, It was actually quite a favourable figure to use, given that the average density of sulphides are approximately 4500kg/m3, Iron also has a relatively high density at 7870kg/m3.
The result of combining the high density copper (30%), with the high density waste (70%) is a copper concentrate with an even higher average density, which would massively reduce the volume it would occupy in the container.....lower than the original 19.206% that I stated. Bringing me back to my original concern.....what is the copper content?
Miffy :
"I hope you have taken into consideration the container weight is between 2200-2400 then there is the trailer the container sits on which would then take it up to around 7000kgs maybe more than that total gross weight could be 30000kgs"
My calculations were based on the maximum payload of the container (28,260kg). There is no need to consider the weight of the container itself (Tare weight), or the trailer.
Gross weight = Payload + Tare Weight
Providing the weight of the concentrate does not exceed the payload limit, then the gross weight limit of the container, and it's contents will not be exceeded either.
PART 2 OF 2
Knowing that the concentrate will inevitably have little cavities between the particles, but also considering that the cavities will be smaller at the bottom of the pile then they are at the top of the pile, then you could reasonably say that the 19.206% volume taken up by the copper concentrate, could actually equate to 25% or 30%.
However, when you look at the images of the fully loaded containers, that were uploaded on Twitter, the containers appear to be roughly 40% full.
Although there are some variables to the calculations I've made, it may be worth pointing out that if the containers are 40% full, as opposed to either 19.206%, 25%, or even 30%, then it would suggest that the copper concentrate is actually below the stated 30% weve been told, and therefore increasing the cost of shipping, as more containers will be needed in order to keep to the companies revenue projections.
What does concern me is why the company would hide/edit the image in the first place, and also why the company seems so determined to avoid revealing the companies cash position (on many occasions recently). And as it stands, we also know nothing about the terms of the offtake agreement either.
Feel free to tear my calculations apart.
PART 1 OF 2
The company uploaded four images onto twitter on thursday, one of the images shows the shipping container with the doors shut. However, for some reason the company has decided to edit the image to seemingly cover the details/spec of the shipping container?.
The image does show the letters HASU, as in Hamburg Süd.........So to uncover the details on the container that were hidden.
Container type :
20' x 8' x 8'6" standard dry container,
Interior Dimensions :
Length = 5.882m –5.898m
Width = 2.332m –2.353m
Height = 2.387m –2.396m
Weights :
Gross = 24,000kg –30,480kg
Tare = 2,220kg –2,350kg
Payload = 21,660kg –28,260kg
Volume : 30m³ –33.2m³
https://www.hamburgsud-line.com/liner/en/liner_services/services_products/container/index.html
I decided to do a few rough calculations, in order to hopefully find some other useful information.
I started by looking at what Volume, the copper concentrate should occupy, as a comparison to the volume of the container itself, which has a maximum capacity of 33.2m3.
The following calculations are based on a 30% copper concentrate, as referenced by the company.
First of all, I needed to know the average density of the 30% copper concentrate. Pure copper has a density of 8940kg/m3. I also made an assumption that the other 70% contaminants in the concentrate had a average density of 2500kg/m3. I will refer to the 70% from now on, as waste, regardless to the potential contained credits.
Based on a cube (1m3, for simplicity). A volume of 0.3m3 (30%) will be pure copper, and will have a mass of 2682kg
mass(cop) = Density(cop) x Volume(cop)
mass(cop) = 8940kg/m3 x 0.3m3
mass(cop) = 2682kg
The remaining 70% waste volume, or 0.7m3 will have a mass of 1750kg
M(waste) = D(waste) x V(waste)
M(waste) = 2500kg/m3 x 0.7m3
M(waste) = 1750kg
Combining the results for both the waste, and the pure copper, I could now get the average density of 1m3, of our 30% copper concentrate, being 4432kg/m3
D(concentrate) = (M(cop) + M(waste)) / V
D(concentrate) = (2682kg + 1750kg) /1m3
D(concentrate) = 4432kg / 1m3
D(concentrate) = 4432kg/m3
Now that I have the average density of our 30% copper concentrate, I can begin to calculate the total volume of concentrate in the loaded container unit.
Given that the maximum possible payload of the container unit is 28,260kg (as stated above) Then the maximum volume of copper concentrate that can be accepted, before exceeding the payload limit is 6.37635m3.
V(max) = M(payload) / D(concentrate)
V(max) = 28,260kg / 4432kg/m3
V(max) = 6.37635m3
Now, when I compared V(max) to the volume of the the container unit (33.2m3) to find out how full the container should be, I calculated that the 30% copper concentrate should fill 19.206% of the container unit.
% = (V(max) / V(container)) x 100
% = (6.37635m3 / 33.2m3) x 100
% = 0.19206 x 100
% = 19.206%
Looks like the Rampers have spent their weekend, ramping the company to all the other rampers.........shame Andrew Prelea couldn't be bothered to show them any support........................not even a photo.
Maybe he is beginning to question his own October deadlines? Sadly, I'm starting to question them............even after all the additional time he's been given.
I decided to have a lie in this morning, it appears that I made the right choice, as no RNS has arrived again. Floatation, Bridge, Offtake, Finance, JORC, where are they? I'm getting bored of being in the red now.
And I hope Andrew Prelea isn't planning on leaving the Rampers looking silly again, given all the recent comments that have been made.
Hurry up and prove me wrong, for Gods sakes Prelea.
It appears that a poster on the bulletin board has an interest in removing my post about Roy Tucker, perhaps they are a director of the company, and would rather this information not become public knowledge, despite the fact that this information is already in the public domain.
So, rather then "allege" anything so outrageous, what I suggest is going on Google and entering the apparently toxic phrase 'Rossminster Scandal' and discover the results yourself. If navigating Google search engine is too difficult for you to master, then I have provided one of the many links below.
https://colouringinculture.org/blog/v22transnationalartwashing/
PART 2 OF 2
As the deadline arrived shareholders were informed with a video on twitter, with text beside it stating 'stages of production', In the companies last chance attempt to re-define 'production' and divide it into seperate stages.
Predictably, the same usual suspects were on the bulletin boards reinforcing the company narrative, regardless to the fact that clearly nobody was convinced.
Realising that investors were not buying it,
Andrew Prelea proceeded with a following interview explaining how investors have mis-understood the situation, and that what he was trying to explain was that 'underground production' would commence six months from funding.
Now, given that the company IS in production, according to Andrew Prelea's revised definition, would it be fair to say that we have officially left the Development stage behind?
The Agreement between Vast Resources and The AP Mining Group states that development costs are to be paid for by Vast and therefore, if Vast have officially entered production then it would seem reasonable to say that AP Group should be contributing towards the bridge replacement costs, and everything from here on.
The bridge, given its age, given the expected increase in heavy loads soon to be crossing, and given that the bridge is so vital in supplying us ore, should have never come about, this work should have already been checked and completed.
AP Group now needs to start contributing, Vast/we have paid for everything, and all of Andrew Prelea's costly mistakes. During his time with Vast, Andrew Prelea has recieved £600k in salary in return for his consistent failures, lies, delays, placings and videos insulting shareholders intelligence. It's time to start paying up.
On another note...........Although Andrew prelea has pretty much now already secured his and AP Group's 20%, I wonder how the market would respond to news of Andrew Prelea standing down...........you may not trust the new guy, but can it be any worse than trusting somebody you don't trust. I think the market would receive the news well.
Anyway, start contributing
PART 1 OF 2
I have been thinking recently about Andrew Prelea's need to have to re-define
what production means.
Looking back over the past two years at the growing list of failures and delays that were building up under Andrew Prelea's leadership, investors were becoming ever more frustrated with him.
It was quite clear that Andrew Prelea was losing control and was under growing pressure from shareholders, as more and more vocal posters were turning to the bulletin Boards to vent out their frustrations.
It wasn't long before Q and A's soon disappeared leaving only Q's, as Andrew Prelea's silence stripped away any of the A's we needed.
Company announcements became increasingly vague, failing to inform, and creating even more confusion then before, which only really helped to fuel the frustrations further.
Andrew Prelea was slowly destroying the company in my opinion. He had lost the trust of a majority of the shareholders through his constant lies, and never ending let downs. His word, and his ability to complete a task could not be relied upon. Nobody believed him anymore.
Then it became apparant that Andrew Prelea had fabricated the idea of being in advanced discussions with four or five cornerstone investors, who were tripping over themselves to snap his hand off to make Vast an offer. Understandably, Investors were fed up and really angry at this point.
Andrew Prelea was now in a desperate need to appease shareholders.......no finance deal basically meant no Baita Plai production.
So in an attempt to re-light investors hopes once again, the company began a "production, six months from finance" campaign. However, In a clear example of how those cornerstone investors never actually existed, Andrew Prelea resorted to choosing a secured $7.1M bridging loan from Atlas instead.
Regardless, All eyes were now on Andrew prelea and his own Baita Plai production deadline of July 31st. Andrew Prelea knew fully well that everyone was now watching and waiting for that date. He knew there was no excuse that could be given for failure.
During the months of May and June, Investors were beginning to sense another missed deadline closing in, and as a result turned once again to the bulletin Boards with their concerns.
May and June was a period of painful desperation for Andrew Prelea, as a stream worthless pictures and videos were uploaded by the company onto twitter in order to try to maintain the share price. By July it was obvious that Andrew Prelea would fail to meet his own July 31st deadline
Where's SandrewPrelea459 too? He appears to have gone AWOL...... maybe hes been busy preparing the next company announcement...........or maybe he has finally managed to get to sleep, given all the "yawn" responses hes been forced to give out to frustrated shareholders in recent times.......and by recent times, i mean from the 1st January 2018.
Anyway, how's our 'Plug and play' floatation equipment progressing......has there been any issues with the plug yet?
On a more positive note, I guess it can't be much longer now till production begins.........or as Andrew Prelea would prefer to call it 'phase 2 processing production'. Lets just hope there's no other unforseen phases of production to discover, before finally reaching that full production status.
I was thinking about Zimbabwe the other day.......... I wonder if Andrew Prelea has managed to find and allocate any work for Mark Mabhudhu and Will Maberly yet, or has he instead chosen to just pay them a salary to do nothing?.
As it stands, Will Maberly is being paid to manage absolutely nothing except perhaps Mark Mabhudhu, who is also being paid to specialise in something we do not have. Unfortunately both Will and Mark (and every single shareholder) are all still waiting on Andrew Prelea to obtain/deliver a simple signature.
I think Andrew Prelea needs to either hurry up and get that signature box signed, giving Will an asset to manage, and Mark some stones to play with, or reduce the company liabilities and let some heads roll.
Fact of the day.........Did you know, the entire mass of planet Earth has made 2 complete orbits of the Sun, and 70% of its third orbit (2.54 Billion km) since Andrew Prelea became CEO.
I want to know what's happened with our two Diamond concessions in Zimbabwe. The Marange Zimanyu community concession, and also the replacement concession for Block Eii, which we lost to Anjin.
knowing what is going on is important because there has been far to much bad press surrounding these deals now. Two CMR companys, allegations of corruption, ZCDC mass resignations, with their assets seemingly being given away to Russia and China, and also their inability to keep up with employee wages, etc.
- Why has there been so much bad press?
- Why has it taken this long to finalise the deal?
- Where in Chiadzwa were we relocated too?
- Why has Anjin/Alrosa had no issues with Zim?
- How far does Zims 'look east policy' actually extend?
Its also important to know because shareholders have waited for nearly two years for this deal to be concluded and signed, and have been kept in the dark throughout the entire process.
It's also important to know because shareholders have been diluted in order to mine for Diamonds in Zimbabwe, and the amount being spent is beginning to build up, which becomes even more relevant if we lose the concessions.
The company has already spent £1M on fencing the perimeters, £600k on preparing for Covid19 on site, there will have also been costs for the numerous flights back and forth to zimbabwe over the past two years, and the accomodation along with that.
Other costs relating to Zimbabwe are the appointments of Mark Mabhudhu, our Diamond specialist who has been with the company since 06.7.18, and then there is Will Maberly, our country manager in Zimbabwe who has been with the company since 26.02.18.
The company has not made any solid agreements to date, but have already gone out spending. If we now lose both concessions, then it would be the board who are responsible for wasting that money by gambling it.
That money would then have been better spent on Baita Plai, reducing the need to pay Atlas their premium.
For the last two years the company has continuously emphasised on how confident they are in that the deal will be signed shortly. They have also always referenced Chiadzwa as a game changer, whilst telling shareholders that we will be pleasantly surprised at what's about to arrive.
Then there is the 129,400 carats of ours that are stored in RBZ.
https://www.polishedprices.com/go/market-news/news~4350
To now effectively sideline Diamonds, and act as if they dont really matter so much anymore is backwards, there must be a reason why the company is acting like this. Why is all of the above and more no longer a big deal to the company.
Personally, I think the company already knows were about to lose both concessions, and I can only imagine they will choose to remain silent until it's officially confirmed, as this would better suit the transition to production at Baita Plai.
If anybody is interested.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/thezimbabwedaily.com/news/489912-ctc-approves-dallaglio-acquisition.html/amp
The company has never mentioned exactly how much pre-prepared ore is stored underground in the galleries at Baita Plai.
Originally, the company was targeting full production at 10kt/m. Mercuria then recommended that Vast should raise that monthly production output to 14kt/m, and so far nothing has budged that.
So what exactly is two years worth of production?
To start with, the mention of this two years worth of pre-prepared ore, pre-dated the arrival of Mercuria, so from this I can only assume a maximum storage of 240kt (24×10kt/m).
However, two years worth of ore doesn't necessarily mean two years worth at the original full 10kt/m.......... so it could actually mean anything.
The company wouldn't have misled investors either, if we were to later discover that there was only 48kt of material in store......two years worth of ore at 2kt/m, for example.
So how much is down in the galleries?.
Ive noticed that the company has never been specific about the amount of ore it has stored (in tons) but rather, used very vague terminology instead.
I feel that the company should have been far more specific here, as this loose wording will allow all the positively charged ions to speculatively ramp this up based on two years worth of ore at 14kt/m instead, when this may not actually be the case at all.
Can anyone tell me how many tons there are down there?
It appears that Vast are fully aware of the truths behind these "unsubstantiated claims" and have tried to cover their tracks. The Deal maker appears to have got us tangled up with the wrong CMR company.
The truth behind these "unsubstantiated claims" have in fact been known of by the company since December 2019 when Vast made a payment of $20k to the wrong CCDT bank account.
Has Andrew Prelea been making payments and signing off documentation, without first checking the credibility of the other parties involved?
Has Andrew Prelea realised that he has just spent £1.6M of shareholders money incompetently, on fences and Covid-19 before any solid agreements were actually made.
It's quite obvious now why Andrew Prelea and certain users on this bulletin board suddenly changed there focus from "Diamonds being the company maker", to "Diamonds would be a bonus"??.
I wonder if Andrew Prelea will first secure his 10% by getting BP into Production, before confirming by RNS the truth behind these so say "unsubstantiated claims" ?.
Another $20,000 wasted
https://www.miningindex.co.zw/2020/05/05/us20k-diamond-carrot-haunts-vast-resources/
2 x CMR
https://www.miningindex.co.zw/2020/04/27/vast-resources-chasing-pie-in-the-sky/
CCDT (Deeds of Trust)
https://www.miningindex.co.zw/2020/06/03/two-original-deeds-exist-for-the-chiadzwa-community-development-trust-ccdt/
ZCDC future
https://263chat.com/amp/political-interference-stunting-diamond-sector-growth
Vast gets dumped
https://www.miningindex.co.zw/2020/06/08/newman-chiadzwa-to-dump-vast-resources/
PART 3 OF 3
However, behind all the misery and conspiracy theory, and beneath all the dead remains of shareholders, plants and animals, signs of life again began to re-emerge.
Holes in the once thick, dark Sulphurous atmosphere started to form, allowing just enough sunlight to reach the earths surface. Small isolated groups of new plant species, grasses and trees began to grow and flourish, bringing colour to a once grey planet.
The surviving brave inhabitants of that post apocalyptic era, had inherited an unknown new world, as they crawled out from their caves and burrows and began to explore the resources that their virgin lands had to offer.
The arrival of primitive new age investors, full of dreams and aspirations began to appear. Highly intelligent rodents such as squirrels, and extremely cunning forms of bacteria of the genus TillyWhizz, and FOOLS_NIGHTMARE variety, developed a new found interest in the stock market.
The new age investor, clueless of the 'AP Extinction Event', was fearless, easily excitable and ultra positive. Many of which, making a name for themselves as they rapidly climbed up the ranks of Pumped or Dumped.
However, their arrival had also marked a time of change, a time of happy clapping and mindless ramping. The transformation made, was irreversible, there was no going back. This was the dawn of a new era...........'The AP Era'.
Sources:
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/insight/main/index.html
https://www.bgs.ac.uk/research/earthHazards/home.html?src=topNav
https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/earthquake-hazards/special-earthquakes-earthquake-sequences-and-fault-zones
https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/weather/climate/science
https://www.dlr.de/pf/en/
https://www.greenpeace.org.uk/challenges/climate-change/
https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/market-abuse/regulation
PART 2 OF 3
By the 2nd of January, the photosynthetic process required by all plant species on the planet had come to a halt. The lack of new vegetation led to the starvation of many plant eating animals, which in turn cut off the food supply of the carnivores, as the effects were passed up the food chain.
Other victims of AP-2018 suffered from the fallout, as the 6.5 billion shares that were created from the impact, fell back to Earth in the form of acid rain, burning all long term shareholders, in a process that continues to this day. Scars of which can still be seen on the holders that survived.
As the acid rains fell, it trickled down mountain streams, converging into large rivers, and began collecting at lower levels in valley depressions, eventually forming the toxic lakes and oceans that the surviving Vast Shareholders can be seen swimming in today. records show that hundreds of the initial survivors drowned as they were washed away in the torrents.
It is said that the AP extinction event was one of most devastating events in the Earths 4.6 Billion year long history, dwarfing that of the 'Chicxulub impact' which wiped out the Dinosaurs of the cretaceous period 66 Million years ago.
It has been estimated, that among the numerous plant and animal species that were driven into extinction, one group were effected more than any other.
The Arrival of AP-2018 forced a disastrous sequence of events to unfold within Vast Resources that would end up wiping out 80% of its loyal shareholders, in a shameful era now nicknamed 'The Great Culling'.
Most survivors (98%) continue to suffer in some form, from the after effects of AP-2018. Data shows the most common effects are PTSD, Bankruptcy, Severe Anxiety, Clinical Depression and Marriage Breakdown.
Interestingly, In the study conducted, it was found that the remaining 2% of survivors strangely showed no signs of any major physcological, physical or financial trauma.
This particular part of the study has been the cause of much debate amongst survivors, the scientific and journalistic communities, and the general public alike.
Research suggests that this minority may not have been survivors at all, but rather, a small group hidden away infiltrating bulletin boards claiming, under various usernames to be long term shareholders, in order to sculpt public opinion and cover up the true impact of AP-2018. The research has gained widespread support, and also goes to explain the strange lack of visible trauma experienced by the self proclaimed survivors.
Other, less popular theories have also emerged in recent times, such as the 'Zimbabwe Theory' which claims that the 2% of survivors, all attended a Vast Resources general meeting, where they were given free scarves to celebrate the upcoming?? Zimbabwe ceremonial signing. The theory suggests that the scarves were used to wrap around the body and act as a cushion, absorbing the impact of AP-2018.