The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen here.
I disagree with the criticism here of the RNS and how nearby the pipeline is. The new acreage is something like 1,500 acres, massive. They have provided plans which I gather show the pipeline so, for those to whom this detail matters, the info is there. For my part and as a number of others have expressed here, there is a lot to be said in favour of patience and putting faith in management, recognising that they are working on several fronts and that the best laid plans cannot all be guaranteed, particularly given the well-publicised resource strains for equipment and manpower.
"Colin's fault" - I agree, not his fault at all. The global environment for getting drilling hardware and manpower, as has been said here before but ignored by some, is extremely stretched (rather like building materials, computer chips and many other sectors have been). Let's balance such unjustified negativity with some realism and a little patience.
Florence: I thought I was on top of this overall but was struggling to work out what real difference this RNS made. Your post is therefore helpful and makes sense. As you say, the bottom line numbers have not changed. Any delay will be unwelcome when so much patience has been demanded of all of us. However, given the results coming out, allowing 6 months extra time for further exploration and preparation of the FS has some logic. So long as Ascendant is not being let off the hook!
We should be looking for a conclusion of the ERM position soonest to remove the lingering doubt, as it makes a big difference to MAFL's outcome. JV must have that as priority work in progress.
Nom: If I recall correctly, did JV not recently mention that he understood Ascendant was already in discussions over or had even received a financing offer? While I believe it is for Ascendant to find the financing, I imagine any financing terms are something MAFL would wish to review carefully and approve before releasing details.
Sher, I agree entirely but perhaps one might add that MAFL needs to attract some institutional holders too and, for that, several multiples of the current market cap before it could appear on any of their radar screens?
The shares are not just illiquid but also closely held with perhaps around one-third in the hands of JV and a few private investors.
I did notice the 10m trades but I think you will find one of those reversed the other, perhaps correcting an input error for the subsequent 1m trade posted?! Anyway, only dealing in a fraction of that size, averaging down and thankful to be buying at below mid.
I fully agree with Florence on the percentages. I do not think that what was originally agreed has changed but what did change was that an early deal struck the the government over its interest never gained the required approvals. Undoubtedly there has been confusion or vagueness over the use of the terms Redcorp and the Project in the past but that is in the past and all that is now clear: the base (and worst) case is that MAFL is left with 5% of the Project. However, my understanding is that EDM is unlikely to put up its share of the risk and development capital (no free carry there!) so EDM's interest should get watered down, the benefit of which would wholly accrue to MAFL.
We also know from the recent news that the government is highly supportive of the Project which should help overcome most environmental concerns.
I simply do not recall the preemption. Nonetheless, I have no real worries as I am sure JV negotiated a decent pricing structure for any such transaction (there are a number standard texts anyway). I think the much bigger uncertainty here is over what MAFL's (THC's) ultimate residual interest is, thought to be under discussion now.
Nom: Thanks. No idea what that quoted section means (actually p.33) but it may or may not be important. The next bullet is of some interest in that THC has given a preemption right over its remaining interest - I do not recall that being mentioned before.
Palms: Thanks for posting the BBC read. There has been a lot of discussion here about delays and time indications not meeting expectations but we all know from personal experience or the press about delays across the board in labour, supply chains and so on (the building industry is but one example). A telling sentence early in the BBC article is the oilman "facing major delays as he hunts for supplies and staff to make the [oil] projects happen". I do feel that not enough allowance is being made for such constantly changing factors and for time indications being thrown out of kilter for good reason. I, for one, am prepared to be patient as I see ZPHR heading in the right direction under competent management.
Nomlungu, I agree. I am quite sure the government angle is being worked upon actively. Surely they either have to put up their share of the risk and development capital or suffer a dilution?
There is no harm in someone raising the idea of a dividend with JV. I would not object to a dividend but merely express the suspicion that he would rather keep his powder dry and his kitty full (excuse mixed metaphors) for investing and financing which is what this company is about. Whilst capital profits can be paid out as dividends, it is more normal to use income profits and MAFL has little or none of those that I know of.
I agree that many of us have been "long suffering" whilst patiently holding here but it is the market which fails to recognise the value here. JV has stepped up his PR but he will not attract institutional money until MAFL moves from the micro cap category. The upcoming news due over the next 6 months might just change perception, with luck and a following wind. GLA
Shaz: I know many here feel MAFL should pay a dividend and I have previously commented on this but not recently. It is worth bearing in mind that MAFL is an investment and mining finance company and will undoubtedly IMHO use this extra capital either to invest in its core portfolio or to finance another LS-type opportunity (we know some projects have been looked at). Were it to start receiving dividends from the LS project, that might be a different matter as regards paying out a dividend. But that is inevitably some way off and for now I imagine it is looking to diversify its portfolio and to continue to improve its NAV.
GLA
Top up for me too. Of my recent buys, one was at mid so shown as "unknown" but nearly all the others have been shown as "sell", including today's. It does give a misleading impression of the direction of travel ...
Outstanding value at these levels, just a bit of patience needed and to be expected at this stage.
Yes, going through 3% (both up or down) is a notifiable TR1 event. Perhaps significant ownership notification is a valid question to address to CH for attention of the Company Secretary, given the massive selling over the last week or so?
A top up by me today is down as a sale, once again.