George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
Interesting metric!
Well last year the directors were paid $355k so I am sure Brian has been working on things behind the scenes...
Saw that - but shares down slightly on that news. Real results are what will count!
It is forced selling. No raise - you incorrectly said that last time so you are nothing if not consistent. ARCM doesn’t meet the left wing teacher’s Union fund’s ESG criteria. Now a fusion of different Swedish teacher funds has occurred, the anomaly has come to light following closer scrutiny.
Laughable report! Instagram posts and search numbers don’t mean a premium, desirable brand. David Beckham wore the brand 17 years ago according to the commentary. Reebok at number 3 - laughable. Ted Baker at number 2! None of these brands have cultural relevance.
Fashion is a fickle business. Superdry brand is the issue despite reasonably good quality products. Younger audience are into brands like Carhartt. Superdry is worn by uncool people and losers who go to places like TKMaxx.
Major Tom.
1. I think they secured a very good deal. The term objectives you cite would be unprecedented and extremely favourable. At the investor event in December, they described the derisory offer from one interested party so I don't think they were inundated with competitive rival offers. Interest maybe, but not offers.
2. I also think they saw AA as a committed partner. NvS said at the investor event that never once did AA seek to renegotiate terms even as Arc ran into turbulence with the legal issues and closure of the Cadastre etc. When we talk about JV's in general , having a good relationship with the senior partner is significant. That is certainly worth a lot in my personal business experience.
3. As previously discussed, I wasn't comfortable with options deal ,but they did show go to some lengths and showed diligence to avoid a raise more recently as the AA deal was finally confirmed. I would like to see directors buy some shares at these low prices when they can - especially as they ended up doing well out of the options.
4. The Tingo sale is often mentioned in comments here. As I understood comments at the investor event, the main objective was to get Casa off the books and reduce exposure/cost. The Tingo share were effectively a speculative "extra".
5. Glad we agree that there could be multiple deposits in the ground in the Zambian licenses. Remember that we have got to a point where we have a virtually risk-free 20% interest. AA are taking on most of the risk with their strong drilling commitment.
6. Allied to point 5, most of us believe that AA also have the experience/ expertise to find the copper! It was never only ever a question of "highest offer wins".
Major Tom
What do you mean by this:
" Then there is the unompetitive farm out /JV process they emcouraged / oversaw".?
Do you mean uncompetitive? Can you explain this please? Thanks.
Fulmar - I can't really answer your question because my LSE feed (which I look at much less frequently these days ) is full of messages that read "This message has been filtered, please adjust your filters to view".
But what I can confirm is that trolls are hired by law and PR firms among others and are generally poorly paid, so I wouldn't expect particularly good grammar!
We live in a world where online manipulation of opinion is rife. If someone wants to buy stock cheaply, or prevent a company from raising, or seeks to pursue a vendetta, trolling is an easy-to-procure service. It is most effective where there is an absence of high quality equity analysis such as with AIM stocks.
Major T : I think you ask very fair questions even if I don't necessarily always agree.
I do think that the options cash in at 7p was questionable and casts a question over the stock for some new investors. NvS said he and the board were advised to do this but I have to assume they must have seen the lower sustained share price as a strong possibility. On the other hand I think they deserve more credit for the deal they have negotiated and seen through with AA, and they were diligent to avoid a raise. They also hold meaningful stakes in the business.
I don't agree with your overall negativity on Botswana. I think it merits further investigation, though you are right to ask why thee licenses weren't bought by Khoemacau or others beforehand; not sure being "nimble and fast" would be enough if Khoemacau had really wanted them. That said, AA didn't want our Zambian licenses and then they did - big companies habitually make plenty of decisions they later regret so Khoemacau may come knocking on Arc's door in the future. For now, they may be content to let ARC do the prospecting knowing that they would be best placed to buy at a lower risk.
But I agree that the Zambian licenses and the huge drilling program are the main event here. Like you, I have high hopes but I am much less doubtful of NVS than you - IMO there are many, many far less scrupulous leaders on AIM.
Devonian
I DO believe in the paid deramper theory! In fact I have seen it in action. Ask yourself - who would want to suppress the ARCM share price…? The world is increasing full of disinformation - including in these LSE message boards.
Block the deramper obsessives, but listen to considered, informed posters who ask fair and important questions.
Agree asimpleinvestor. I am a NED of two companies and run two. I am sure you and others have good experience. I think among us we will be able to chart an appropriate approach if required. Therefore important, I think, to keep the collective contact live if it becomes necessary.
Remember that DC strongly advocated purchasing the shares shortly before the suspension. I have the moment on video. Having made those comments, I imagine he is doing everything to find a way forward for LVCG. He knows investor will not just "take it on the chin" and he wants to avoid any sense that investors were misled. Employees are part of that shareholder base. So let's see. But I'm realistic. SmartArt was a disgraceful transaction and k-pop was incompetent. The other more minor "events" in Cape Town were lifestyle driven. The only part that is interesting is bricklive and a large chunk of that has been sold off.
Agree ThereSheGoes. But DC and Sarah should ignore this idiot and focus on the last RNS. I was pleased the SmartArt deal was reversed and can see k-pop has been a disaster. I would advise not to respond to shareholders individually beyond a polite “thanks - we’re working to address the main points detailed in the last RNS”. Hope (like everyone) they can see a way to creating some value.
What profits?
The bricklive business was hit hard by Covid but this was viable and had a clear route to profitability with some hard working people on the ground. But much of that seems to have been sacrificed. What company valuation could that support? The rest of the business is worthless with the much heralded StartArt now acknowledged as a dud by being taken back by the sellers (who know they would have been scrutinised for a severely distorted “independent” valuation that shareholders never saw). As for this new investor, we’ll let’s see. I’d love to be proven wrong but what amazing new business can suddenly turn things around and who is going to run it?!
We're basically back to a brick events business with the model building capability lost.
We need to see those accounts, and read them carefully.
The K-pop event in Frankfurt - better to work with a partner that knows what they are doing. But it won't make Live Company much. SmartArt (reading between the lines) is having trouble finding a venue in London.
The company will need WC so better to raise - but we need to be vigilant that it used wisely
Not sure I would sell at 1p. There appears some commitment from the company - they just need to learn from past mistakes, understand what they can/cannot do well and directors appreciate that trust is the number one way to create long term wealth.