Member Info for slowlyslowly

Perhaps you missed my earlier post. I can't see how it can be P&D given we've just had the highest daily volume for 3.5 years, the fourth highest volume of all time. (One day was higher in 2020, one day was higher in 2019, one day was higher in 2010 - otherwise that's it)

Broomtree points out that the volume today is 2m+, compared to an average of 200k

dictum points out that it doesn't take much to move the SP up a few pence

It might help to put today's volume's in perspective.

Today's volume so far is somewhere between 2.7m and 3m - different sites give different tallies intraday.

Yesterday 1.3m shares traded. On 5th Dec we had a strong day at 2.6m. Looking left on the chart, 14th March was a good day at 2.16m. 13th Dec 2021 we hit 2.27m.

In fact, today is the highest volume since 28th May 2020, 3 and a half years ago.

So this does not illustrate how we can move up a lot of pence on a modest volume. This really isn't a modest volume. It's record-breaking volume.

But it does signal that this is not just someone having a bit of a pump and generating some interest. This is the most serious buying this share has seen for some time, so something is driving it.

As to what that is, well that's anyone's speculation.

The takeover code is for companies buying or selling other companies, not companies selling an asset.

The people who took the 15p shares were described as already being shareholders, so don't need to wait for Friday to sell any shares they wish to sell. They all already have some, so Friday won't be the moment when those people are suddenly able to sell shares and bank a profit. I don't expect the price to fall back on Friday - it may, but not for that reason. Similarly, they could sell some today, or already have sold. Certainly, the price does not need inflating artificially ready for Friday to come.

>> "Pre announcing a possible raise at 15 p was bad imv"

Although wasn't the price already below 15p when they announced that, so they were inviting people to price-match Jim's option exercises at a point when that would be premium.

Regardless, as a result of Jim and the placees the company should now have plenty of cash to see it through the asset sale. And Jim would have got to exercise those when a sale went through anyway, so he's not added us any dilution when the sale proceeds get handed round.

No. Resolutions for authority to issue shares are standard. I'm interested in the change of domicile, and the comments in their background notes on why that's needed and what it opens up.

More interesting than the date of the AGM are the resolutions tabled. Surprised everyone is more interested in the exact date.

They did. They sold to Ben Turney and Peter Wynter-Bee. Peter took just over £500k worth of stock

If he was forced to take it private by taking over 30% without a waiver from the CMA then he'd be required to make an offer for the remaining shares, and the minimum he could offer would be the highest he has paid in the past 12 months (not the highest paid by anyone in that time).

If he chooses to make an offer for the remaining shares, he can do so at whatever price he wishes. If the board choose to put his offer to a shareholder vote, obviously he stands a higher chance if the price his higher.

That hopefully clarifies those rules that are often misunderstood and misquote. But, of course, that is entirely theoretical, since there are no hints there is any plan other than to find a buyer for La India as Mark has explained on numerous occasions.

Well, it can be binary. Depends on the project. Or you find certain widths at certain grades at certain depths, and you have to assess what to explore next, whether it's economic to develop, and so on. Often, the actual numbers from a drill campaign are very important and complex to interpret.

A lot of people seem to be setting their sentiment for Cizzle based on the rise (or, at present, fall) of Conduit, as though Cizzle were simply a proxy for Conduit. It's like Cizzle is nothing more than a cash shell, and our value is solely set by how well our holding in Conduit performs.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The fortunes for Cizzle are set by how well the CIZ1B biomarker performs as a readily available early diagnostic test for lung cancer. We're looking for progress on entry into Chinese and US markets, obtaining UKCA mark and NHS approval, etc.

But let's pause to look at how much a rise or fall in the price of Conduit should affect the Cizzle share price.

We hold 395,460 shares in Conduit.

We have 363,841,773 shares in issue.

That's to say, each Cizzle share holds the equivalent of 0.00109 Conduit shares.

Conduit IPOd at $10 per share. So at that price for Conduit, each Cizzle share gets $0.0109 (£0.00892) of its value from its Conduit holding. Since listing, CDT shares have dropped to $2.60. So each Cizzle shares has lost the equivalent of $0.0085, or £0.006938. 0.7p.

So that's a decent chunk. But these calculations highlight two things

1. It's a fraction of the Cizzle share price. So most of Cizzle's share price is nothing to do with the fortunes of Conduit

2. The enterprise value being ascribed to the Cizzle test under development is tiny.

If that test succeeds, the boost that will give to the share price will dwarf what our Conduit holding will be worth, however much that goes up in value.

And, given they've listed post merger, we may assume they meet the criteria for doing so. Case closed

Surely the very fact that Conduit and Murphy have now merged means that the "initial listing requirements" referred to in your second paragraph have been met, and this is now water under the bridge referring as it did to a company that has been succeeded.

Yes, the three things I look for are potential in the assets, management who are competent and looking to advance the prospects not just draw a wage, and sufficient funding.

1. Assets. Look at the postcode. Near neighbours of the type of Barack. Previous results from drilling and sampling from past owners, and our own work. In the case of Sunbeam, a past working mine that only stopped because the tech wasn't great for extracting anything less than near nuggets 100 years ago. Sampling already backing up huge potential at Esa and North Hemlo.

2. Team. Look at the past achievements of people like Marc Sale and Bruce MacLachlan. Look how hard they work. And the quality and frequency of comms is like nothing I've seen in any other listed explorer.

3. Funding. They've just raised at 10p, and are fully funded through this exploration season and next. Also a huge warrant bank to grow the funding as progress raises the share price.

Spot on Kutzz

Once again - what selling action? If they play this how they've done similar investments, they won't start selling these from the time they need to make the first payment.

We'll see instantly if they do, because even a small sale will take them below 26% which would be a notifiable change of position.

I'm looking at the TR1s from those shares. Did the share price do well after this? No. Was it because of the terms of the finance? Hard to say, maybe it would have dropped anyway. But did they sell everything as they went? No

On what basis are people saying they'll sell their shares to cover each month's payout? Sure, they could. But while there were some TR1s for the other two companies I'd found with the same arrangement, it was nothing of the scale of selling 1/24 of their holding each month, and in one case they even took part in a subsequent placing (only putting half of those further shares into a sharing agreement, whilst holding the rest as a regular subscription).

People seem to be assuming that one way they could play this, the worst way for the share price, is inevitably what they'll do. Nobody has explained how they can be so sure this is what will happen.

It's why I explained the deal at such length yesterday. We need to be clear on what we know, beyond which we can speculate but can't pretend to be sure

Out of interest, I could only find two other examples. Someone said there are over 40. Can we build a list of tickers and dates?

In all, this is a higher risk route for them, but with potentially higher reward too. For us, if the share price rises, a CLN agreement could kill any rise as it gets sold into. Here, that would happen far less, because the rising share price also makes their later payments much higher.

Interests are aligned here, in that the best outcome for shareholders and for Lansdale is if the share price heads steadily up. They have protected themselves in case of decline, but they'd get less profit if that happens. I can't see why this agreement will bring about a falling share price, in and of itself. That would be down to sentiment and progress in Senegal and Cameroon.

So I think this is basically a good deal. That said, I agree with others who have said that this must be a last resort because they couldn't raise in a more traditional way, and I also agree that the money here may not be enough to finance all exploration. But they have said they're looking for project level finance for that, so that's not a fault with this deal.