Member Info for snooz

>Not a bad day today - up 8% at one point on no news. Not long til the AGM now : )

I asked a very similar question before... but did it unnecessarily sarcastically (sorry to all for that). Please read this as a genuine question:
Where did you see this +8% ? All I saw was the Bid: 0.85 & Ask: 0.95 unchanged all day.
Sometime I have submitted some RFQs to RSPs just to see what they'd quote - it's always inside this spread up to 1m shares.
I'm starting to wonder if there's a better-connected broker out there than what I'm using as I'm missing out on some better prices.

AGM is at: 10 November 2021 at 10am (Greenwich Mean Time).

andmillsy> cash from placing 150,040,800
less cash for KAP 1mil lbs @$47.58 -47,580,000
less cash for Courzon 2 mil lbs @$46.32 -92,640,000
NAV$ 905,927,147

Is there's an extra ~$10m to be added to that NAV figure? The cash due to KAP and Courzon sum to almost 10m less than the receipts of the placement.

I bailed out when it last went above 370p... and immediately regretted it as I watched it continue to rise. Now, more by luck than judgement, I'm back in at a couple of percent less.

I guess the lesson here, one that I've avoided having to learn the hard way, is: don't hold this thing when it gets about 10% above NAV as the management will use it as an opportunity raise capital.

Sure, the one share doesn't multiply - but the process of it being lent from one to another to another can be repeated.
A lends to B. B sells to C. C lends to D etc. A & C are both short. This is what happens in those cases when the short interest is over 100%. Or, to put it another way, if I were a corporate: I can sell to someone, they lend it back to me and I sell it to them again.
If anyone sells something that they don't have, then there's a settlement failure, a "failure to deliver", and that's where I'd like to see some proper penalties (rather than more law) applied.

"only shares held and available may be loaned to shorts." - still wouldn't work:
Scenario: You hold a share. Lend it to a short. They sell it to someone - that person now holds it. They lend it to a short (maybe the same one). Repeat.
People would only lend shares they hold but you still end up with a system where huge (even 100% or more) is lent out.

I'd like to see the penalties for failure-to-deliver increased a lot - puts the pressure on the shorts to be really sure that they can locate and deliver the shares that they sold - hit them where it hurts, in the wallet.

https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/THOR-MINING-PLC-39432762/company/ lists current share ownership. I'm not really sure how up-to-date/accurate it can be/where they get their data from, but note:
- MBB Trading Pty Ltd is also Mr Billings.
- The AIM rules are that if 3% is crossed one way or the other there would be an announcement: https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/w-009-1710 so he has still got >3%.

Naise> Have you had a look at the trades going through on ASX?
I can see daily trade volumes... is information about each trade published freely like the LSE does? No matter, it's all such low volume... when I look deeper I'm just seeing patterns in randomness like seeing faces in clouds... I now agree with you, care about "which way the price goes and the spread" rather than looking at individual trades.

>How many shares did Mick Billing have? Is this pattern him selling them?
To answer my own question: https://www.thormining.com/investors/share-information
At the end on Jan, Mick Billing: 3.22% -> 52m shares. I reckon a broker has been selling his bit-by-bit daily.
But then, on the other hand, based on my understanding of the LSE rules I would have expected an RNS when his holding crossed below 3%.

Maybe I'm seeing patterns in randomness... but I saw a pattern:
There was a period where there would be 1m sold per day, at a random time per day.
Then that changed to some days where 3m was sold.
I'm sure it wasn't a retail customer as a retail customer would have noticed it would have been better to do it in sizes of 0.5m and 1m as much better RSP quotes were available for those smaller sizes.
And now we have these 2.5m "Non Protected Portfolio" trades (previous one looked like it was at mid, this is at the lse offer).

How many shares did Mick Billing have? Is this pattern him selling them?

To correct myself:
>now only have to provide proof that they are legally allowed to use the access routes the site(s)
I don't think this is true, I've mixed up my own research. The pending permit work is to do with a San Miguel permit & when that's done the Colorado DRMS permit should be approved.

With a lack of trading & price action, to keep me (us?) entertained I've made a list of URLs of Thor-related stuff. Perhaps use a tool to monitor and alert for changes (I'm open to recommendation of such a tool)...

• ASX announcements, they are usually available before RNS:
https://www2.asx.com.au/markets/company/thr
I guess any significant news and trading based on the news should show up hours earlier here before on the LSE and RNS. "Tomorrows News Today" worked for that Bond supervillain, if the news ever makes any difference, then maybe it'll work for you.
• Live RNS - Link above.
• Company website:
https://www.thormining.com/
• Youtube vids:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCHJ05BUIVbYgVmZqm5q215A .
• Tweets:
https://twitter.com/ThorMining
• OTC - Even thinner volume than on the LSE.
https://www.otcmarkets.com/stock/THORF/quote
Any action here is unlikely IMO.
• Some rather pump-y chatter:
https://hotcopper.com.au/asx/thr/
• Wedding Bell permits:
https://drms.colorado.gov/information/permitting-actions-currently-under-review
Quite possible that a change might be seen here before a RNS/ASX news release on the matter of the permits. My understanding is that Standard Metals (not Minerals as it was called in the news release) now only have to provide proof that they are legally allowed to use the access routes the site(s) - the proof should come from BLM? It's all old dirt tracks rather than public roads.

>Rinse-Repeat. SP will dictate any significance here. There will be a sp rise on Fridays close this morning then slowly drop back to status quo.
>Stealth was spot on with his post. No need for sarcasm.

Maybe SP would dictate significance - but I would say volume is a better indicator IMO.

Regarding the predicted SP rise and fall - please pick and choose some data to support your argument that stealth was spot on, as what I am looking at doesn't support this argument.
Friday closed with the order book bid/ask of 0.80-0.90, bid spent the day unchanged, ask was 0.85 for much of the day and is back at 0.90 now.

> Anybody watch Aussie Gold Hunters on Quest? Lack of water's often a problem for them.
Maybe I'm doing that thing Brit's do where they don't appreciate the size of the country. But Alford East is near the south coast right - not the deep outback?

Burleigh> The attraction of THR- for me - is its spread.
I guess you mean the diversity of the projects, the different locations and metals(?) (and not the bid-offer spread?)

At the risk of continuing a topic (the topic of 1.3p) where I sense people are getting tired. Some observations:
- 36m (not 20m) options at 1.3p : https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-02434661-2A1330512?access_token=83ff96335c2d45a094df02a206a39ff4
- LSE says 52wk high was 1.4: https://www.londonstockexchange.com/stock/THR/thor-mining-plc/company-page
(That might be the highest LSE order book best offer rather than what was actually traded at though)

And some opinions (mine):
- The number of warrants and their exercise level of 1.3 seems very reasonable, it strikes a good balance between cost and providing incentive.
- Issuing OTM options/warrants to directors is an effective incentive.
- 1.3 is an indication they they have confidence of growing the price above that. These aren't binary options... the value is linear with price above 1.3p - i.e. directors won't be putting their feet up when 1.3001p is reached.
- The diversity of projects, activity, means lots of scope for good-news stories which could attract new buyers and move the price considerably.
- I do like to hear differences of opinion as ultimately price discovery is about the balance of opinions.

spot7 > Please excuse my ignorance but if they (directors) are issued warrants they still have to pay for the shares.
Yes. Each warrant gives them the right to buy a share for 1.3p any time in the next four years.
Idea being it's worth zero if the share price stays below 1.3p. If the price goes above 1.3p, you'd expect them to exercise the warrants to buy shares at 1.3p (and then infer what you like based on how quickly they sell them)

hoopyhoop >The total price of the 20m warrants at 1.3p is a mere £26k
I reckon you've dropped a decimal place there - unless you're doing some calc and reckon the value of a OTM option at 1.3p is 10% of the strike - I think there's some options on ASX, one might be able to actually see the market value of such an option.

I was a bit unimpressed with the director's shareholding, so see it as a positive that they are 'invested' in getting the share price up. That the exercise is only just above a 30-month high... yeah, understandable you will feel underwhelmed.
Anyone got a summary of what directors existing warrants' exercise levels are? I guess if I looked at an RNS from around this time last year I'd find it in there.

>Plus that is one large amount of warrants
"The proposed warrants have an exercise price of 1.3 pence and may be exercised at any time from the issue date through to 4 years following the issue date."
With an exercise price of 1.3p though, seems very reasonable?

Alternate link to presentation (tested & it worksforme): https://s3.amazonaws.com/bigmarker-extension/6542053efa5e-94886c22f1e8abecc46a791754847959/6542053efa5e-94886c22f1e8abecc46a791754847959.mp4

Replay at https://presentations.investormeetcompany.com/investor-meet-company/THOR-MINING-PLC-Final-Results

I joined it late, so not sure if I missed any news.
Molyhil has some more potential than I had realised - but I think that's surely all in the existing releases & I just hadn't 'digested' it previously.
There was a status update on the Wedding Bell permits... which was to expect a status update from the company about those in a couple of weeks. It's just a longer process than expected, but nothing is going wrong with the permit process. Giving dates was avoided, perhaps the update in two weeks will be to provide dates.