Member Info for StarBright

I don’t think that AVCT is at all vulnerable to an unwanted takeover approach. This because:

1. The current register is dominated by PI’s, many of whom would try to hold out for fantasy prices (can you imagine this board??). Thus execution risk would be extremely high.

2. It’s an intellectual capital business. Without the active support and commitment of the scientists and others who make the business work, there is little value to an acquirer. The senior team would have to be 100% onboard before a takeover could proceed.

Timster - the impact of any potential NASDAQ listing can’t be assessed at this point because there are so many ways in which such a listing might be achieved. It’s not right for you to make the flat assertion that “...it wouldn’t impact on your UK shares...”.

Did you ask them why?

Just dissociating myself from StarKnight, who is not me or anything to do with me..!

Check post histories for confirmation:

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/starbright/

https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/starknight/

I'm happy to take flak on anything I post. I'm not taking his as well though!

I looked back to find this interesting post from EWT98. How do the results RNS'd today stack up against this?

As always with mining companies, it is very hard for non-mining-experts (like me) to parse survey/drilling results like this. I'm very comfortable decoding funding RNS and picking apart valuations etc, but have no objective way of determining whether results like these are good or bad. Much less determining how they might impact the value of the company, or its SP in the short term.

So I am hopeful that some of the more experienced LSE posters will offer some insight on this here for discussion today. One observation I will make is that a large component of the SOTP valuation discussed here previously rests on this project, so the results are important.

There's a big difference between "more likely" and "likely". You can't just drop the more..! It is more likely that I will win the Euromillions jackpot than it is that I will score a century at Lord's.

marcusg71 would say I am LIKELY TO WIN THE EUROMILLIONS JACKPOT. I wouldn't..!

The comment from Martin Fewings shouldn't be selectively quoted in a way that changes its meaning. He says only that Glencore are more likely to sell the project than they are to develop it themselves.

Deals get done when all parties are equally unhappy with the outcome..!

You want to pay 50, I want to sell for 100; we might just do a deal at 75... It’s ALWAYS about the opportunity for regret being distributed equally.

Ok - fair question.

Shard announcement = no choice on timing I suspect. Perhaps forced by the NOMAD to make the other one?

If they had to be released on the same day, I think two separate RNS was the right presentation.

It is possible that ZIOC itself is the bottleneck. I can't see "the Chinese" (your phrase not mine!) being particularly keen on allowing ZIOC and it's shareholders - who in reality haven't contributed much - to walk away with a fortune. I once walked a company I ran away from a deal in Taiwan where, at the last minute, the seller asked us to split the consideration differently between the majority and minority shareholders. This was - we were assured - entirely permissible under the laws in that country. I'm not suggesting that could happen here, only observing that morality and legality can be questioned when there is a perception that parties are benefitting unfairly.

To be clear, the prospect of benefitting unfairly is precisely why I have held a core holding in ZIOC for years and will continue to do so until resolution is reached. A framework like that proposed by G_G_G is the likely route to this, but it will only be achieved when all parties fell they have missed out evenly. ZIOC by accepting a BMV price, and the prospective buyer for making ZIOC rich in return for very little input... This is the province of the best investment bankers; let's all hope that some are engaged behind the scenes here!

There you go Sootysnipes...

FWIW, I've bought back the shares I sold a few weeks ago when the worlds-most-obvious-ramping-crew were here. Thanks guys...

I don't think you are missing something. I think you are looking for something; a reason to be annoyed.

The two RNS relate to very different aspects of the company. One is an operational update (of sorts!) and the other is a capital/financing matter, the timing of which will likely have been out of ZIOC's control. I don't see any problem with two separate RNS releases.

I agree with the idea that the RNS is consistent with the existence of topics they can't mention at this point. I was once a director of a company that had to put out a TU whilst there was market speculation on a takeover - which we'd be working on for month. We were forced to put out a flat TU with no hint of anything to come, followed just 5 days later with news of the acquisition. Sometimes timetables can be a problem. Perhaps the NOMAD here has insisted that the cost re-estimate is released, regardless of other activities underway?

Speculation not analysis!

Interesting RNS. As much for what is not there as for what is included. A couple of points that stick out for me on first reading:

1. "Capital expenditure expected to range between -2.9% and +2.5% of the 2014 Feasibility Study estimate" - capital costs for major projects have increased materially in the last 18m, partly because of the increased cost of steel and other basic materials. To show no overall increase from 2014 levels looks like a real-world decrease to me.

2. Interesting to see that the floating port idea hasn't been included.

3. Presentation of the updated reserve estimate is referenced, but they haven't included the previous figures for comparison. A pet hate of mine... Does someone have the "old" reserve estimate figures to hand? It would be interesting to see the difference(s) laid out clearly.

4. Absolutely nothing, nada, zilch, not even a hint on any discussions underway

Interesting spread of views between this board and AVCT. Here, it is “What % royalty will AVCT expect?”. There it is “Will we have to pay ODX any more than 50p per test for assembly and packing?”.

Holders of both companies have a natural hedge against an unexpected outcome to this negotiation.

My May-21 silver calls expired worthless a couple of days ago.

A nailed-on harbinger for silver to roof next week..!

Good question.

rocquet - the staff took the options because they are being allowed to buy shares at 4p each. Those shares are worth 72p on the market today. They've been saving from their salaries for 3/5 years for this.

Rob_ has explained it to you, but he can't understand it for you.

No - this is the scheduled maturity of a sharesave scheme set up three or five years ago.