Member Info for rustybucket

Hi Lawrence13, did I not read that we were "buying" refractory ore to process for ourselves. ?? And it will certainly have a bearing on POG as we wont do it for free even if it is for others.

KRSS, You do not know gold is cheap, you are reading newspapers and reading the internet.

Hambro thought it was cheap year ago gambled and lost. You would be the first person to say " why didnt they hedge some of the gold " if price went down.

Now, I am not suggesting gold will go down, because I genuinely dont know, these are unprecendented times, but sometimes an each way bet, with some of your money is nota bad thing.

Anyway, everybody to their own. As a footnote, surely if gold price goes up, surely the price we pay for the concentrate goes up, so those who say we will make X Y AND Z, that might be true of any we mine ourselves, but is unlikely to be true of any we buy in to process.

I wouldn't disagree, the point I make is we guaranteed to get to this position by hedging to make enough profit to finish the pox hub. I believe that was a condition of the lenders. Reality is however much we potentially lost by not hedging pails into insignificance in what we can stand to make if they use the pox hub sensibly. And the best time to hedge is when the price is high. Now, I am not for 1 minute suggesting they hedge it all but a proportion isn't a bad thing. Onwards and upwards.

Lawrence13, I don't think its unfair at all, he gambled, he lost. And I think if he had won and kept his shares we wouldn't have got in as much trouble as we did. I am not sure but is he not something like president, his main position at the moment is on the good ship IRC, Now, that will be interesting what happens if that particular ship sails. !!???

I do think it was just one trade, ( looking at the trades recorded ) but why somebody would want to trade at that price is beyond me.

Updownflat, I disagree about hedging. Everybody says how bad hedging is. BUT, Anyone who has followed POG though thick and thin, would realise that the reason POG got into this mess was Hambro GAMBLING on the gold price and LOSING. If POG had been hedged at the time and Hambro not gambling, he wouldnt have lost his shares, and in my opinion woldnt have allowed the company to get into the mess it did.

I have posted numerous times about "having skin in the game" and Peter only had skin in the game through put and call options which have now lapsed, paid for by someone else.

If ( and I am NOT saying this is likely ) THE GOLD PRICE CRASHED, THE CRY WOULD BE, "WHY DIDNT THE COMPANY HEDGE WHEN THE PRICE WAS HIGH " So, in my opinion, some hedging is not a bad thing.

We could only finish the pox hub on the guarantee that there was hedging in place so even if price went down, we had enough profit to finish it. Yes we lost out as gold did not drop, but now we have the pox hub up and running and have a lot more options to make money. As always my opinion only.

If Pog were to reach £1 you wouldnt be talking ftse 250, you would be talking ftse 100, BUT, There are going to be extra shares issued, through the purchase of TEMI, AND if bondholders convert. So if they both happening interesting to see the effect on the sp.

The share buyback has nothing whatsoever to do with the closing price. Its how many and at what price they are able to buy them during the day within set parameters of the average of the last days. Price paid yesterday was just over £1.38 even though price ended considerably below that.

I wonder how many shares they were able to buy back today, and at what price.

Share price of 20th February. God knows why anyone would pay for this site. Total Joke.

KRSS, I apologise in advance for saying this, BUT, you are deluded. POG have $125m dollars of convertibles and $500 m of other bonds. So to suggest net debt of $300M ( in my opinion ) is ludicrous. Because that would suggest they had cash of $325 m.

KRSS, If they had $325m of free assets they would pay for the whole of the TEMI deal in cash, and then use the rest to buy more concentrate to make more profit. Reality is somewhat lower. When results are known it will give us an idea but, last time the next debt was at about $520 m not exact approximate. If you believe I am wrong show me your Maths, and then explain why they wouldn't just buy TEMI with the free cash.

krss, Your post previously, OSCOW, April 2 (Reuters) – Russian gold miner Petropavlovsk said on Thursday it had decided to exercise an option for purchase of one quarter of the TEMI project in Russia's Far East for $53.5 million, of which 40-50% will be paid from its own cash, as rising global gold prices and a weaker rouble boost the gold miner's cash flow.
The remaining part of the deal will be paid by issuing new shares of the company. If shareholders vote to approve the deal on April 16, it will be closed by mid-May, Petropavlovsk Chief Executive Pavel Maslovskiy told Reuters.
The deal with Agestinia Trading Limited, disclosed by Petropalovsk previously , provides several options to exercise it,

Your post today, POG achieved $1388 sale price for 514k ounces year ending 2019. So if AISC $900 or $ 1000 or $1100, its possible that POG has free cash from $100m to $200m. Q1 went very well because of Gold price playing around $1600, Rouble weakness & oil in March. If above estimates are correct, two possible routes can be predicted. So if POG only had the lower of the amounts, why, oh why, wouldnt they just pay it in cash. There is even the talk of a small rights issue, if they had that sort of cash those noises would not abound. So my suggestion is they DO NOT have near that amount. Time wil tell.

PJSC Asian-Pacific Bank ('Asian-Pacific Bank'), LLC Insurance Company Helios Reserve ('Helios') and Peter Hambro Limited were considered to be related parties as members of key management had an interest in and collectively exercise significant influence over these entities until 22 June 2017 when the Group lost significant influence over these companies. The wording that is interesting to me is until 22 June 2017 when the Group lost significant influence over these companies. I aways said something wasnt right with the asian Pacific bank ?? I remember RNS about share holdings hedges etc relating to these.

If they had $120 million of cash, then why wouldnt they just do the whole transaction in cash ??? This is POG, it is never the way you would expect. Years and years of surprises and a lot of them were not good. !!!

Rights issue, at deeply discounted rate after they said talks were going smoothly, Sapinda, board removal, bond re issue, price of coupon for debt, INCLUDING conversion option, Pavels and Peters ( supposed" support for the rights issue ( with their banking friends and put and call options ) etc etc plenty of shenanigans. And the above is what I could remember from the top of my head ( oops forgot about the purchase of the helicopter ) there are numerous others.

Time will tell, but, if we can use their resources, rather than having to buy it in coud be a no brainer. Personally I dont know why they dont just sell some more gold to Gazprobank ( or whatever they are called ) and pay it in cash. If they were willing to provide money for IRC surely they should be happy to fund this deal on the basis of forward contracts.

There was very little, NOT, to like, except the normal with POG, the unknown, and the uncertainty. But, very, well positioned.

The presentation is in depth. It looks at performance. It looks at forward projections. It puts more information out about the possible transactions of Temi and IRC and is very informative. Takes about a minute to upload ( the broadband speed where I am isnt fast ) so some people might upload quicker. Also gives update on outstanding dents and maturity dates. As I said worth a look, especialLy if you dont know a lot about POG.

I dont have to engage with our resident nut case.

The results spoke for themselves, for anybody, with half a brain. They can read them

fel from the figures in the TRMR share news ( lol ) S pretax profit fell to $3.6bn from $27.2bn.

Tremor commits to $10m buyback amid Covid-19 crisis
Tue, 31st Mar 2020 11:53
(Sharecast News) - Tremor International said it had the financial strength to buy back $10m (£8.1m) of shares during the coronavirus crisis after reporting strong growth in 2019.
The video advertising technology company posted an 18% increase in revenue to $325.8m for the year to the end of December. Gross profit rose 24% to $138.5m and pretax profit fell to $3.6bn from $27.2bn.

The San Francisco-based company's shares jumped 24% to 141.65p at 15:08 BST.

Annual revenue was supported by the company's acquisition of multiscreen advertising business RhythmOne in April 2019. This offset a decline at Tremor's performance-based division.

Tremor said it was too early to judge the impact of the Covid-19 crisis but that its travel, hospitality and restaurants clients would be most affected. Utilities, pharmaceuticals and online sellers may be less affected, it said.

The company said it had net cash of $76.9m that would allow it to buy back $10m of shares and trade through the coming period of uncertainty created by the Covid-19 pandemic. Many companies have been scrapping distributions of capital to shareholders to hold onto cash during the crisis.

Tremor said it was monitoring costs and speeding up the integration of its acquisition of Unruly from Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. The deal gave Tremor exclusive rights to sell outstream video on more than 50 of Murdoch's titles with a guaranteed ad spend of £30m over three years.

Ofer Druker, Tremor's chief executive, said: "We have made a good start to 2020, most notably, executing on the acquisition of Unruly, which is directly in line with our strategy to focus on video, CTV and data, and provides us with further opportunities through which to drive material growth in our core markets.

"We continue to closely monitor the impact of Covid-19 across the world, with the health and safety of our staff of paramount importance. As a business we remain optimistic about the long-term prospects of the Company and we remain focused on delivering value for all our key stakeholders."

In the past with Blinky and then Rhythmn1 the management have been criticised for adding a purchase to the results, often to deflect attention away from the results ( in my opinion ) it is refreshing to see a set of results with " real profit " and cash generative, including increasing cash, even after the buyback previously. A step in the right direction. Well done. All my opinion.