Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
Amstrad, why are you concerned where it is or isnt ?
There are some relevant questions :
1/ How did they arrive at the offer price ?
2/ Where is the Independent Expert Report with a valuation ?
3/ What do they know about the status of the court cases , which had depressed the share price ?
4/ What value is being attributed to the 10% holding in 10% holding of the ordinary share capital of PJSC of "Mining Company Ukrnaftoburinnya" ("UNB") , a significant O+G producer in Ukraine, which they appear keen to hide away ?
Cant believe there wont be a review of this, or has London become such a den of thieves ?
Is it a further $75m or a further $50m by end 2022 ?
For 2022 perhaps $100-120m looks achievable as rates follow untilisation and they state 92% for H22021. The prospect of another equity raise in 2022 is receeding. Apart from the woeful financial reporting function, things look like they are ion track....
A number of people entering around 3p might think the same esp if there is a lack of operating results.
For 2022, i expect EBITDA of $120-150m and as the cash rolls in , equity value should replace debt as it gets paid off.
it sounds optimistic, but if you look at 2014/15 and similar companies, you will see the powerful operational gearing inherent in the business.
Agree, that they might want to drop the Seafox junk assets into the company...
For Castro to have bought in much higher up, when the sesv and o+G markets were much softer and and now to not take up the open offer when the company's immediate future is secured and the underlying market firmer is a bit of a connundrum.
Some of this heavy turnover will be the same share flipping across holders. I hope someone with a strategic eye and a long term view has picked up a blocking stake.£3m to control the fate of a $450m enterprise is a cheap option.
I was watching for the past 3 years and have bought occassionally and then after the debt agreement as i could see trading improving. I applied for max over allotment.
My understanding of the issues to watch as far as I am aware are that we need to be well clear of the 10% which would allow a forceout in a bid situation. The more pertinent issue is the level of seafox friends who would not be not deemed connected parties, as they will be able to bugger things up for us if they use a scheme of arrangement.
Any corrections/additions to this view are welcome.
Any other
This is unfortunately misguided.
Competent investors ask for and generally get the most up to date figures in order to make a decision.
[See other fundraisings]
When stand up companies raise capital, they provide true and fair views. ie up to date figures.
GMS have the Q1 figures to end March and could have used them. Unaudited, true but so where the final results.
It is the decision not to include the Q1 figures in the fundraising docs that is one of the more obvious problems.
The management's intentions and the lack of independent directors allows this.
But they have used the calender end 2020 figures, not the current figures and added the fund raise details.
E class vessels were going for 9% more this year than last year and nearly all of that increased revenue drops to the bottom line.
This is a serious failure of governance, not to present up to date figures, especially when there has been such a significant turn around in the business.
Thanks, well spotted.
It was Aberforth on behalf of the Wellcome Trust, a charity. They have ignored the investment merits, in favour of other considerations, shirking their fiduciary obligations.
Strange price action, but small volumes.
Thinking of the big vol last week. What is the reporting schedule for significant holders ?
Like the 2 previous bids at higher prices ?
You are catching on...
What I dont like about the raise is
1/ The lack of notice on the terms of the raise.
2/ The lack of clear up to date guidance ...where are the Q1 figures ?
3/ The unnecessarily low price. How do I know it is unnecessarily depressed ? Seafox bought more shares last year and this at a prices well above the current sp. and in the teeth of the oil price collapse , tried to bid for GMS ie. they found the company attractive even last year. Subsequently, we know the vessels are in higher demand and earning more, so why the lower price for the offer shares.
I have subscribed in full and applied for excess, but the board's actions have been designed to worry and rush shareholders, who will therefore be less inclined to subscribe for their shares...and when they do, who is there to mop these up ?
Seafox of course.
A failure of corporate governance, but I see end 2022 net debt $280m and a $100m op profit supporting a share price of around 21p [x5 operating profits] and the banks waiving the obligation to raise the $50m, due to cash generation.
If x 6 valuation 28p...gearing works both ways!
Certainly am, in 2014, when they had 10 vessels, utilisation rate was 97% and operating cash flow of $123m.
Current year utilisation rates 81% , but we now have 13 vessels.
Enterprise value at 31/12/20: Total liabilities = $448 - current assets $36m = -$ 412m [ignoring fixed assets] - $25m from open offer= $387m
+ equity 1.016bn shares at 3p =$40m
so about $427m EV earning I estimate around $70m ebitda this year and $130- 160m peak, looks v cheap to me !
Debt will start to get paid off rapidly from H2 this year.
Let's see...
Article unavailable..
Agreed. The lack of audited results and numbers on Q1 trading is clearly designed to obfuscate the company's strengths and create doubt in shareholders minds, before a lowball bid. Remember, the board have similar company which they have explicitly said they wish to merge. How do we know there isnt a problem with trading ? The banks will have checked the books and would not have provided a better deal if theirvery large loans, relative to equity were at risk. In addition we know that a few different equipment providers are reporting 80% utilisation rates and we know that above this day rates start to shoot up.
I hope people are contacting the company to register their disastisfaction.
Key issues will be utilisation and day rates. These were glossed over in the last t/u.
Also the financing update;interested to see if they adopt scare tactics or lay out an inclusive plan. Suspect a change in par value to enable a rights issue.
Bearing in mind the behaviour of the new management of late, which seemed designed to frustrate a refinancing, I think there is a chance that the loans do get called. However, if this were to come about and they then attempted to buyout and merge with SF, they would be open to an action for abuse of minority shareholder interests. Thus I suspect that they will salvage a deal. Again their advisors will remind them of their obligations towards minority shareholders. Whether the deal is as good as that which was offered 2 months ago is quite another matter.
Yes still here from 2013, bought more at the wrong prices since !