Member Info for SharketMare

Quady, you have said multiple times that we will not get a bid unless there is a change in the make up of the shareholder register. Or 'book' as you call it. It's there in black and white in your posting history for all to see.

put a rocket under*

Tightening spread and a welcome rise towards the end of trading today. Plenty of news to come - drilling updates, directors taking up options and PFS July/early Aug. Ghana's MIIF could become a major shareholder, too. That would put a rocket SP for sure.

Fair enough Quady not sure I've understood what you're getting at.

Addicknt has summarised it all quite well in his last two posts.

Have a good weekend

"If we want to sell off tenements, then we will need to sell a larger share or maybe 100%.
Therefore we will be attributing a higher value, and as such maybe will be used as part funding of Alpala and Porvenir. Hence this is about part funding and not about selling our flagship projects."

If my understanding of this morning's RNS is correct, none of this is accurate. We can still sell off below 50% of any asset we own, it just means that (if we don't reach the 50% threshold) it has no impact on the directors' LTIP/Bonus.

Separately, whether we sell off 30% or 50% of an asset, I fail to see how a greater number would be "attributing a higher value". The valuation is totally separate to however much of an asset we decide to sell.

It seems odd for some of our shareholders to find that clause so problematic if an asset sale wasn't in the offing?

My reading of the clause is that the LTIP/Bonus would have been unlocked if the company decided to sell an asset that accounted for 30% of its total book value. This figure has now been upped to 50%. Is that right or have I misunderstood?

Lunch - I'm sure Q will be along shortly to hold his hands up and admit he called it wrong. Just after that pig flies past my window again.

Morning redknight, funnily enough the same thought crossed my mind late last night as I was reading through the coverage. Thankfully I think those days are long gone.. particularly for Western-owned/listed businesses. Would I put it past the Chinese or Russians in Central Africa? Not a chance.

Not sure I understand your comment Quady or what my comment had to do with a bid.

I think the fact that we're reading about political unrest in Ecuador in UK Nationals has probably meant that some investors have reduced their exposure. Not sure this morning's 10% drop can be attributed to profit taking, but no doubt you know best.

Looks like the potential for political instability has spooked some investors this morning. Once again kudos to Pbow and other that flagged this on here.

It's probably worth getting the CEO's name right if you're going to complain to the FCA. And stick to facts. You can't claim that "GGP has over 50% private investor ownership, and all are refusing to trade their stock" - it's simply untrue.

Separately, as has been well documented on this board, this share is being heavily shorted. This is public knowledge. It's hard not to read that complaint as one from a disgruntled investor invested in a share that is currently under pressure from short sellers. Shorting is not illegal as much as many people would like it to be.

Ham, I'm sure they will keep digging as to date shorting this share has been a very profitable exercise for them. You can dress it up all you want, but from the mid-20s downwards JPM have called it right and are sitting on a tidy profit. The fact that they are (if it is them) increasing their position does not bode well for retail investors looking for a quick turnaround here, and implies there is potentially some more pain to come in the short term.

For those currently worried about their investment here but have time on their side, the smart play is to average down as and when you can and check your portfolio less frequently. Once this goes into production and is generating cash, the shorters will be distant memory and the SP will be multiples of what it is today. Switch off & enjoy the sunshine!

Can't say it's overly surprising you're unable to read a fairly basic RNS, MassiveRay, given that your investment strategy appears to be based on hunches, guesswork and childish BB spats.

bankrupty, whether MIIF invest in ALL or not, we will have a relationship with the Ghanaian government simply by virtue of operating within Ghana. Once we start generating revenue, we will be paying into its coffers through taxation. We are already employing and upskilling the local workforce.

We need to be very careful we are not strong-armed into giving a chunk of the company away on the cheap as a quid-pro-quo for our license to operate. The bullish language from the MIIF (and the initial article the in press that ALL were not expecting, and were forced to issue an RNS about) is a bit of a double edged sword - yes having them onboard as an investor would be great for ALL long term, but only at a price which existing shareholders deem to be fair.

spoon_key, thanks for starting what was an interesting thread - I enjoyed reading the discussion between you and Malva attempting to value the 5%. Yes it's been discussed on here before, but who cares. Repetition is no bad thing, particularly when it comes to getting ones head around subjects that are new and complex (which to the vast majority on here, they will be). You seem like a decent bloke from your posts and it's sad to see people try and shut you down. Ignore them mate and enjoy your Sunday evening.

Pbow, thanks for taking the time to share the relevant articles on here.

Been a couple of months before we've had anything exciting to discuss (the PFS). Would be nice to know a little more about what's going on behind the scenes, what newsflow over the next few months is going to look like. Nice to see the share price holding up in an otherwise bleak market.

"How much dilution to build Alpala. The company says minimal. I believe them."

Quady, were the company to say anything other than this the share price would tank. Personally I struggle to see creditors entrusting current management with enough capital to build Alpala, unless a major is brought on board as a JV partner with a controlling stake.

You have to laugh. Time to switch off again.

rcgl2, there are a whole host a reasons a company (and by extension its assets) might not be accurately valued by the market at any given time. I will give the example of another share I am invested in, ALL, formerly IronRidge Resources. For months this share was undervalued because the investment case wasn't clear. They had a strong lithium asset that showed huge economic promise in Ghana with the potential to be in production by 2024. They also had gold prospects in the Ivory Coast and Chad that would clearly require greater capex and more drilling. They spun off the lithium assets and the new company almost doubled in MCAP within two months, because the market knew what it was buying in to.

I don't think that ENSA and its potential is currently valued properly by the market. I think that the PFS we produced was fairly conservative and has done the job of demonstrating to the market that 1) Alpala is economically viable and 2) the management team are capable of delivering what they promised.

For BHP and NCM, the investment case for Cascabel will be very clear, and they will be aware of its yet untapped potential. This is why I think they will be paying far more than the £700m you suggest.

rcgl2, would love to hear your own thoughts to the 3 questions you relay on here. The one around financing is the one that really sticks with me - hard to feel we're not now at a juncture whereby financing for further exploration and mine development around Cascabel simply has to be hived off from the rest of the portfolio. Which is again why I feel that a sale of ENSA is the route we ought to take (I think a spin off poses more problems than it solves).

Bozi, your point on cash rich companies being undervalued is a fair one, but I would hope the asset sale would at least result in a rerate that would allow some LTHs to exit or at least cash in on some of their holding. That is certainly what I will be doing, even if we were only around 60-80p.

Finally, and perhaps this is slightly too tin-foil-hatted, but, our new CFO starts on June 27, 3 days before the EGM. If a deal has been hashed out over the last however many weeks, the last thing you want is a decision maker coming in to the fold late in the day who might have their own opinions about how things should be structured (you would either end up in a situation where she was CFO but not calling the shots, undermining her authority long term, or a CFO forced to make decisions from a position of relative inexpeirence on a deal that she wasn't privy to from the outset). Joining 3 days before the AGM she can quite reasonably watch things unfold without expecting to be on the hook for anything. Perhaps a few steps too far with this one...

Cracking day of racing up at Huntingdon today, my first time at the course. Plenty of hardship before the tide turned and Aiden Coleman landed a tidy gamble on the lucky last. A good omen for Monday I feel!