Member Info for ronmcdonald

I actually disagree, and the text you've copied from the announcement has been included in all updates. Regardless of the delays in the process due to the Mexican issue (clearly a red herring), my broker (ii) closed the option to accept the offer last week, so I assume its results, including my rejection to the offer, have been communicated to BCN/GF. Similarly, I assume most other brokers would have followed suit, hence the jump to 56.6%. So who is left to vote? If GF cannot reach the 75% to delist (let alone the 90%), but are able to commit to developing BCN to production by acquiring BCN, the remaining shareholders are likely to be in a very good position. I guess we will find out soon.

If GF cannot reach the 75% threshold to delist from AIM - those PIs holding on will see this share explode in my view

Does anyone know what % of the issued share capital is owned by management? I'd like to find out if they control over 75%, and I could only find the CEOs c.40%...

The website to follow for CNEL is: http://www.zkty.com.cn/ but I'm not sure if it's up to date.
One of the reasons for the limited news to investors is the lack of a new investor relations team in HK, which was supposed to be set up from London after the listing. But I imagine quarantine etc has slowed things down. And with no IR team -> no announcements...

That is true, Ian.B, and I understand the theory. But in practice, let me give you the example of TRX (10 june):

"The nominal value of the Company's shares is currently 0.5 pence which is higher than the Issue Price. As the issue of new ordinary shares at a discount to the nominal value of those shares is prohibited under the Companies Act 2006, it will be necessary to undertake a capital reorganisation ("Capital Reorganisation") to enable the Company to issue new ordinary shares in the future (including the New Ordinary Shares) at a price which is less than the current nominal value of an existing ordinary share.

It is proposed that each of the Existing Ordinary Shares be sub-divided into:

(i) one new ordinary share of 0.1 pence each in the capital of the Company; and
(ii) one deferred share of 0.4 pence each in the capital of the Company."

As I said, it would need a special resolution and a share split, which I used to think was unusual...

Are you sure NSF cannot issue shares below the nominal 5p? I've seen at least two examples (only in the last few weeks!) where companies issued below their nominal value via share splits and special resolutions... also, having followed NSF boss JVK, I think it's likely he'll go big, placement AND rights issue, involving everyone and anyone! AIMHO

When will the *Excess* shares be awarded and begin to trade? I can't find it in any RNS... anyone know? Many thanks

Thank you, Idiot441. Great post.

My concern, other than the obvious, is that we (and the BOD) assume ARB is one of the most efficient miners in the world. But if the majority (65%) of all miners are in China, where electricity costs are not only extremely low but are also subsidised by the government, and staff salaries, warehouse / land / hosting costs are also very low -> how can ARB claim to be one of the most efficient miners in the world? ARB may have the most efficient *machines* (except for Z11s), but that doesn't make it the most efficient mining *operation* if all other costs are much higher than in China.

My point is that while ARB needs to consistently buy new machines to remain efficient, the Chinese are happy to run old machines as it's almost free to run them. And the proof is in the hash rate - it hasn't dropped with the halving. In fact, it's reaching new record highs @+141 EH/s (June 26), which we weren't apparently going to see until the end of 2020!

And the worrying thing is that at current BTC prices ARB is *not* making a net profit - as just revealed by Idiot441 - which means no returns to investors. The BOD talks about mining margins and EBITDA etc, but when you take into account the consistent purchase of new machines and their fast depreciation - ARB sadly doesn't make a profit. Which means it can only hope for a BTC price rally if it wants to make profits and boost the SP... AIMHO and very happy to be corrected if I'm misunderstanding something!

The scenario you describe will only generate MORE sub-prime customers as evidenced in the 90s & 2008 crises, so NSF is absolutely in the right place - the problem is NSF itself, biting more than it can chew just before covid

I don't think people question the fundamentals of SLP. I think the question is whether SLP's operations will be disrupted again in the immediate future given a second lockdown seems inevitable in SA, which is one of the few places in the world (in my opinion) where the second wave is grossly underestimated. It will be brutal in my view, like San Francisco in 1918. So why invest now if the SP is likely to fall further independent of fundamentals? AIMHO

Mining margin -> How do they calculate it? What expenses are excluded? Just trying to understand how profitable this is and if it's still loss-making. I wish they'd provide more relevant figures...

Totally agree, Rosewall.
Thanks for the link, Wmsjames. Promising, although: "The directors do not currently have any intention of exercising the authority granted by this resolution. The directors will only exercise the authority to purchase ordinary shares where they consider that such purchases will be in the best interests of the Company and the shareholders generally. " But promising

Difficulty has remained high this month (only down 6% since halving); hash rate down 20% max?; BTC price remains subdued vs expectations; while rewards per block are down 50%... if these figures are correct (and please correct me if I'm wrong), I think this month's results won't be great for ARB unfortunately. Also, wasn't the 1m loan supposed to be paid back in June with FCF?

"discussed numerous times albeit indirectly"? *albeit indirectly*?! LOL
"first time you've posted on this thread" - yes, so what? I guess you've been posting on this thread before SLP was founded, right?
"reminding people of facts they already appreciate" - I suppose you are "the people"?! The sad thing is, if I would have said - the share price will be 100p by July... you would have raved about my post... sad

"either that or we are all seriously missing something" - you may be missing:

1. the manufacture of catalytic converters is / will reduce significantly this year, and

2. although SA is re-opening for business "after" the virus, the actual number of covid cases (in Pretoria in particular) is going through the roof right now. Maybe SLP will have to shut down operations again as the gold mine next door has done? Just look at where SA is on the covid curve: it's just ramping up, and it's likely to get worse as SA moves into the cooler and drier winter period... (cold & dry weather + no-lockdown = ideal conditions for the virus to spread)

I think you are missing a trick if you don't consider depreciation. The machines aren't cheap and they burn out pretty quickly... so although your EBITDA may look good, once you factor in the "D" your actual profitability will reduce significantly for this type of business
IMO

"Crazy no value attributed to its assets lol" - if you believe those asset values... do you believe the reversal of the $35m impairment is legitimate?

How risky is it for Regal to be owned (54%) by Ukrainian billionaire and politician Vadym Novynskyi?
The reversal of a $35m impairment is highly unusual... I'm wondering whether someone had a gun to their head while they "reconsidered" the impairment...

And, like the FT says, Argentina aren't going to pay either.. they have never paid their creditors properly - they consistently default even with much more powerful creditors than those in YPF

Agreed, but they need to do a roadshow to get their mcap above £50m to reach the threshold to list on the HKEX. In the current climate, not sure who has the appetite to pay 4 times the current price so that they can list... they are a bit stuck in my view, but I hope you are right