The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring financial educator and author Jared Dillian has been released. Listen here.
having said that...
in my list of shares I now have the following:
Condor Gold PLC ord GBP0.20 with my current shares, and below it:
Condor Gold PLC new ord GBP0.20 (SUB SHS CLAIMS PURPS) but with nothing in it
Can anyone advise what on earth that means?
I have nothing under "corporate actions" or "voting mailbox"
???
I don't think I really care about the SP. It's all about the long term divis for me.
The low SP has allowed some of us to obtain a large chunk of shares in a very well run company at a very attractive discount that will hopefully be delivering large divis at some time in the relatively near future and beyond. I also tend to think that with a redomicile to somewhere neutral the war will cease to be relevant to POLY. The BoD already seem to have navigated their way through lack of equipment and the closing off of previous sales routes so...
If the IIs and PC brigade don't want to buy them (and hence the SP remains depressed) I really couldn't care less.
All my own opinion ofc DYOR etc :-)
Well I tried to work it all out on a spreadsheet but it's defeated me so please do your own sums :-)
However the numbers play out (in terms of existing share options and 19M warrants that expire next year and beyond) it would seem that whether we take up our allocation or not we will probably be diluted a bit, but maybe not catastrophically?
Worst case according to my flaky spreadsheet (all share options and warrants taken up and Jim gets his full warrants as part of a full raise of £4.2M) our existing shares would be down to 66% of current value (voting rights, not GBP necessarily). Taking up our 1 for 6 would reduce the hurt to 77% of current value
I'm very new to this game, but that seems to suggest to me that Jim is allowing us to participate in a relatively fair way? And if we genuinely think that the sale will realise north of 50 or 60p (at current share issue level) then it's probably worth taking up the offer of 1 for 6?
Arguably it would be worth asking for more but I can't fathom whether this would likely be under or over subscribed?
I'd love to see alternative numbers by someone who understands all this as my figures above may be wrong! DYOR etc.
I take comfort from the following excerpt from their shiny website:
CORPORATE OBJECTIVE
Condor's primary objective is to maximise shareholder value through contracting and operating a mine with an annual production of 100,000 ounces of gold per annum at its La India Project in Leon Province, Nicaragua, together with further expanding the mineral resource at La India by 1 million ounces of gold and proving a 5 million ounce gold district.
The board is highly committed to undertaking sound corporate governance practices in the interest of the Company's shareholders and believes it will enhance the probability of achieving its corporate objectives by focusing most of the exploration efforts on projects that have a robust exploration model with excellent potential to generate early cash flow.
OK ok it's a shiny website, maybe it would be better in some document that had legal standing?
But for me the key takeaways are "maximise shareholder value" and "in the interest of the Company's shareholders". Given who the largest shareholder is and in the absence of debtors in my opionion we are not about to be sold down the river?
GLA DYOR etc.
Good question re how shareholders benefit...
For me the key phrase is "...has concluded it is in the best interests of the Company and all stakeholders to sell the assets of the Company..."
As shareholders we are certainly stakeholders, so for the RNS to be accurate it would seem that we would be getting something that was in our best interests whatever that may be?
If the company continued then it will end up sitting on a large pile of cash which it could distribute via a special dividend?
Either way a very interesting question and perhaps one to put to investor relations if such a thing exists?
PS According to everything I read Condor has no debts (and hence no debtors to pay!)
cheeky nibble at 2.43 ;-)
fingers crossed...
ok, daft question time... what workarounds could be considered?
Could JRS (a company) simply relocate to another "friendly" jurisdiction whilst retaining the LSE listing?
do not feed the troll
Riccardo was the non-exec Chair appointed in March to replace those who abandoned ship. I don't see his departure as being particularly important, just a hired figure head?
Giacomo has been there since early 2018, is a Finance guy, and was head of the Audit and Risk committee... so slightly more material imo. Maybe watch where he pops up? Could just be a move to a new "less exciting" job?
However, if the departures were to relate to any of the current(?) conspiracy theories I would have expected them to be gone before 22nd September not afterwards. Just my two penneth.
DYOR GLA Have a nice day
I'm not aware of being charged to vote.
Seems to be a very simple affair on ii who sent me a mail with the voting options last week.
I'm not going to engage with green boxes, but this all feels very logical to me;
1. There will be no dividends paid until all shareholders can receive said dividend.
2. They can't re-domicile the company until all shareholders are able to vote.
Point 1 has been clear for months...
Point 2 is required because the presidential decree says that as an "unfriendly domiciled company" we CANNOT sell the Russian assets period (hurrah in my book, but that's another topic).
Given the geo-poilitical situation (and the missing 11% of shareholders?) idk if these changes will fix either of the above points but they seem a sensible approach to trying.
GLA DYOR Have a nice day etc.
ok enough of this drivel; back to filtering the armchair generals who make even Liz who can't be Trusted almost sane.
Thank you Sagacity for a very informative post.
A very refreshing change from the constant drivel from armchair generals about the war mixed in with "gold will go to the moon" and comments that would have been summed up more succinctly by Private Frazer in equal measure.
The truth is that nobody knows how this will play out. My personal and totally inexpert opinion is that these assets are currently very cheap for what they are but clearly carry a significant risk of "problems" due to sanctions.
In this respect the BOD appears to be being vrey transparent about all of that which I find reassuring.
It then remains a purely personal decision for the individual as to whether the risk / reward is acceptable. You pays your money and you takes your choice!
All the name calling and grandstanding on here is very depressing.
Good luck to everyone.
Possibly so, but why whould you (or they) throw 50% of the "true value" down the drain by selling on the cheap to Chinese investors?
Presumably for PR reasons?
Which makes no sense at all.
This is a Russia fund, the clue is in the name.
If someone doesn't like Russian assets then they can sell now but I fail to see how JPM could or should do this unless the mandate is changed; which seems like a very strong argument not to change the mandate!
In the current climate I would vote no!
The value is locked up in Russian assets. If we are allowed to diversify and / or it becomes possible for JPM to sell the Russian assets we could be looking at a "greenwashing" firesale. Why would anyone want that?
If you don't want Russian assets (for whatever reason) then you can sell out of JRS at any price you like, but a change to the mandate could lead to a JPM sale of Russian assets at a distressed price which we have no say in just for good PR.
From an investment point of view I hope that the JRS board go on holiday for 2 years and we can review this when everything else has blown over.
To be honest I completely agree with you buckeye, I was just trying to see if anyone could offer an understanding of a "split". The answer seems to be "no" and it's all b****ks. A MOEX or LSE holder owns both Kaz and Russian assets so any kind of "split" sounds like nonsense to me whereas selling the Russian assets is conceptually simple. I'm just hoping that they kick the can down the road for two years and it will all seem like a bad dream (shareprice wise)
I think buckeye makes a really interesting point here.
Or put another way...
We keep talking about a split or an asset sale.
1. If the company (POLY) sells the russian assets to "someone" then the company (and hence the shareholders) will own the KAZ assets plus whatever cash (loss of debt) it gets for the russian assets. So far so simple and the whole sanctions problem goes away (for now).
2. If the company (POLY) "splits" into POLY-R (on MOEX?) and POLY-K (on LSE?) then one might assume that the russian "value" would bein POLY-R and the Kaz "value" would be in POLY-K
But as bukeye points out this becomes confusing for the shareholders.
In scenario 1 there are shareholders in POLY on the LSE and MOEX. They all equally own the company (POLY) hence they will all equally own the resultant KAZ assets that remain in POLY once the russian assets are sold. This is all fine and dandy except with sanctions we would remain in the situation where the MOEX shareholders can't be paid any dividends(?). So far so understandable (but ultimately useless in that it gets no-one further forward vis a vis sanctions).
In scenario 2 I'm less clear on what happens. Let's ignore the debt for now to make things easy:
Imagine that the value of POLY is 10
Then imagine that the split results in POLY-R being worth 6 (on MOEX) and POLY-K being worth 4 (on LSE).
How does this work for the original shareholders who (either on MOEX or LSE) had an original share in a company worth 10?
I appreciate that for scenario 2 I may have that wrong, and there has been lots of talk about "keeping everything in the group" but surely that simply remains foul of the current (or future) sanctions?
Which leads me to conclude that kicking the can down the road for 6 months to 2 years and hope that by then the world has moved on is exactly what the BoD should do in order to protect the value of the long term holders who used to own a company worth 10 that is now "worth" only 2?
Sorry, I don't know :-(
All I'm doing is posting the portfolio breakdown from 31st March 2022 that I downloaded from the JPM website a few months ago.
Looking at 31st March and 31st May spreadsheets I have suggests to me that Gazprom, Sberbank, Lukoil and Rosneft ADRs / GDRs / whatever they were have to a greater or lesser extent been converted to "common stock RUB" which I take to mean MOEX shares?
But I could easily be wrong, sorry.
Seems to suggest the 14M Gazprom was all ADRs back in March?