Member Info for SickOfTheRatRace

At figures shown in your post a raw profit of $4900 x 720 tonnes gives an EPS of 0.46p. That's not going to set the world alight but will raise around $3.5m profits which can be reinvested.

When the mine goes full production assuming they get to 5500 tonnes then the EPS gets to 3.66p.

If tin should increase to $22,000 by 2025 as you say then EPS gets to 6.2p.

These are raw numbers and assume no other deductions, maximum output and costs under control.

There is very good potential here for sure, the very grey area is just how big the dilution is going to be to get full production up and running. Personally I think this is going to be quite high because at a placing value of say 3p even a 100% dilution only raises £16m.

I am personally not expecting a dividend here before around 2022/23 but if they stay on track with the build plan and ramp up quickly there should be significant upside to the share price in the interim.

Not sure what the reference is in this thread to a disgruntled individual, thanks for the additional posts about transfer experience, appreciated.

I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that the company built in a FeV price over $100kg into their forward planning when the price was in the twenties. The scale of the increase and profits being generated are exceptional.

The impression I get is that the previous institutional placing was caveated by the requirement for a dividend policy hence the kick into the medium term to formulate and announce it.

Although I have previously speculated regarding dividends what I or anyone else wants here from a dividend policy is actually irrelevant as we have minimal insight to the company grand plan. I have absolute confidence the company will announce a policy that meets their forward capital needs and will return the excess of that to shareholders. All we await is the announcement of what that framework will look like.

Ophidian whilst there are of course multiple possibilities and interpretations of where we might be in three years please continue to share your thoughts which I know are based on solid fundamentals. Personally I cannot see how anyone would have a problem with a target/valuation based on this. Targets with no substance yes, but targets with fundamentals to back them should never be feared no matter how outrageous they may seem at the time.

I was calling £1 during mid single digits based on the power of the vertically integrated model and had a number of accusations thrown at me including being accused of being in the paid employ of Bushveld Minerals!

So please keep predicting as they help all investors old and new to follow the metamorphosis of this once in a generation opportunity.

Alfa any thoughts on another First Island situation with one of the previous II's offloading a fixed amount?

@skier1 from what I see you are currently in contravention of LSE chat board rule 5c - post misleading or false statements regarding the share price and performance.

Unless you can substantiate the claims that there is a Vanadium bubble (there isn't), that the BMN share price has spiked up on this (non-existent) bubble or that there are a bunch of Vanadium mines opening imminently I would politely suggest that you stop posting misleading statements that may be deemed to be market abuse.

Having a bearish opinion regarding the company or market is one thing but posting blatant misinformation that has no material basis to try and support a bearish position is quite another.

Why hello sldmr, good to hear from you.

Unfortunately in this case selling and buying back isn't an option because my shares are marooned in a nominee that doesn't trade on HKEX. The only option (according to them) is to transfer them but I really don't want to transfer my other holdings as well.

I will keep looking, appreciate the reply.

The company specifically stated November for a Bushveld Energy update at least on the electrolyte constraint which gives only 9 working days (not including today).

The price has fallen on all of my purchases bar one very lucky one bought on an artificial drop/bounce. All are now in the black.

I appreciate it's never nice seeing an instant loss but given I can never seem to call it right I just put it down to be a part of my personal investing - one of the reasons I could never be a day trader!

Anything bought at these levels is going to be rewarded purely on fundamentals.

Updated.

UncleJohn seems to be there twice as UncleJohn and unclejohn with the same number of shares, presumably this is an error?

Thanks Razor, these are past years stocks so no funds from this year. I only want to transfer one stock not the whole thing. If you have any provider names that can do a partial transfer please let me know. Should add also that the target ISA should support trading on HKEX.

Quick question to all readers if I may, do you have experience of part transferring a stocks and shares ISA to another provider? I don't want to transfer the whole ISA, just one of the shares within it and retain the rest of the shares in the existing ISA. Thanks in advance for any guidance.

Quick question to all readers if I may, do you have experience of part transferring a stocks and shares ISA to another provider? I don't want to transfer the whole ISA, just one of the shares within it and retain the rest of the shares in the existing ISA. Thanks in advance for any guidance.

Clearly "some analysts" don't have a clue what a structural deficit is.

This is not a bubble.

Ninvestor if you are referring to the PI holding spreadsheet this has been around for a few years I believe. It was originally designed to get more of an understanding of PI voting power, if I recall correctly when it was originally filled in PI's were declaring a holding of 40 - 50% of the company.

There has been dilution since then and it was in the days before significant institutional investor interests but certainly some "big hitters" have been accumulating almost continually since then.

The chance of the Chinese reversing rebar specifications are in my opinion very slim to none.

swampdub I agree with you but the problem is that this is a Plc so the altruistic wishes of Fortune and the board take second fiddle somewhat to the wishes of shareholders should an offer be made. It would be down to us to vote down any realistic offer.

From where I am seeing these institutional investors buying in large stakes fills me with dread somewhat, as it is usually the case that II's are happy to vote for takeovers should the price mean they make a good enough profit regardless of the future potential.

I think it would fall to us PI's to make enough noise against.

JP8891 I have no intention to get into your debate with cindercone, just in regards to the iron ore I believe it was mentioned previously that Fortune said Iron ore would need to be $100 a tonne for them to look at it again. At the moment that would require just under a 50% increase from current levels.

Of course that may change if they literally have nothing else to work on but it would seem they have their hands full on more lucrative projects for quite some time yet.

Having read some of the comments today a reminder for anyone also reading.

Tax avoidance - minimising the tax you pay by compliance with government tax legislation - legal.
Tax evasion - minimising the tax you pay by ignoring rules or not declaring when you should - illegal.

In the eyes of HMRC ignorance is no defence. Anyone who has lived in the UK for all their lives will be aware of high profile tax evasion cases where the defendants have ended up imprisoned and/or with large fines. Are you willing to go to prison or pay penalties of up to 200% of the tax owed because you tried "I read it on lse.co.uk!" as a defence?

There are enough legal ways to minimise (to as much as zero) CGT and it would seem the question posed also has outcomes that could legally avoid CGT.

Before following any of the advice posted earlier today any reader would do well to consult an appropriate tax adviser for their own personal situation. Get the advice in writing and keep the document.

numpty following my previous message look at the following RNS for figures:

26-Sep-18 07:00 RNS Interim results for the period ended 30 June 2018