Member Info for StarBright

Ha!

*** = cigarette. You can guess what has happened here...

And I'm not sure what has happened to the capital letters I typed!

@extrader - thank you for the fascinating info you've provided here. not just today, but over an extended period. i will do you the courtesy of having a whag at your question...

[*** packet mode=on, e&oe, ymmv etc etc...]

taking mm's gbp5-gbp10/share npv (which is broadly consistent with the 2014fs evaluation) and applying edison's modal norm 15% ev/npv discount gets us to somewhere in the range of 75-150pps.

if the buyer's secret starting expectation is the undisturbed sp and the seller's secret starting expectation is the npv, then:

- the "buyers regret multiple" (amount paid / todays sp) is 9x. that is they've had to pay 9x more than the undisturbed sp.

- the "sellers regret multiple" (npv / amount received) is 7x. that is they "should have" received 7x more per share

thus the potential regrets are broadly similar, so i'll go with a "realistic stab" as 75p to 150p

that's well below some of the targets in the charity thread, but a massive 9x to 18x multi-bag from today's sp.

don't try this sort of thing at home without a responsible adult, boys and girls...

Almost had me interested, but 700k shares not £700k…

Plenty of PI’s for whom that is a normal clip.

Interesting discussion.

There are very very few documented cases where “legacy/ransom equity” holders have realised super-massive gains in the manner popularly supposed here. The chance of ZIOC’s historic equity holders being able to trade out at 250-400p are perhaps infinitesimally small.

Distributive deals are priced/done where both parties feel significant discomfort. In this case, the eventual buyers of ZIOC’s equity may have to hold their noses and deliver multi-bag gains to legacy holders who have in reality contributed little in the way of capital or expertise. But those same legacy holders may have to accept a price a long way short of their 400p hopes and dreams. Only when both parties are equally disappointed has a true price been found. Typically this requires a true deal-maker, motivated and capable of getting both parties to accept reality. I’m not sure who that deal-maker is here.

My hope is that ZIOC is bought out at a significant premium - hopefully a multiple - to the current sp. But I think that some ZIOC holders should temper their expectations. The reality is that those who have contributed little (but have been in the right place at the right time) rarely realise the life-changing gains they might hope for.

The existing facilities (AUD220m + AUD50m) can't be used to purchase the 70%. It is entirely wrong to view them as some sort of war-chest that GGP can use as the OP proposes. See * below for details of permitted purposes.

If GGP were to purchase the 70% it would need to fund this purchase, PLUS the remaining development costs for 100% not 30%.

For this reason I am sceptical of reports from the Town Hall that SD stated "We can afford it". Unless of course "We" refers not only to GGP, a not inconsequential distinction! If he did say it, he probably shouldn't have...

* The bank consortium facility is expressly for:

- to refinance the US$50m Newcrest Loan Agreement in full

- to fund called sums with respect to the Havieron Project

- other costs and expenses not included as called sums and costs in connection with the Havieron project or Joint Venture including taxes

- Greatland corporate costs and other expenses

* The Wyloo facility is expressly for:

- Funding Havieron joint venture called sums and chargeable costs.

- Payment of interest to Newcrest Operations Limited under the Havieron joint venture loan agreement.

- General working capital.

- Corporate costs and expenses of the Greatland group.

- Interest, fees, costs and expenses in connection with the Facility

That is my take too, @Veteran10. There are a probably a lot of throats to stuff (not just management!), and this takes a little time to organise and effect. I am hopeful that there will be concrete news before Christmas.

It is v possible though that they won’t be able to keep a tight enough lid on this as the in-the-know circle is expanded. So news could break at any time. If you are interested but don’t yet have a position, I think it is time to act.

MCap still just £50m after the rise yesterday. There is clearly significant scope for further appreciation here, so it’s an excellent candidate for the speculative compartment of your portfolio.

The 2x 386k (£208k each) trades look like buys at 53.9p, filled at 14:28 while the quoted spread was 53-54p.

One way this may play out would be for the cost review to confirm that an extra $XXXm is required. Shareholders will be told that the necessary raise will have to be priced at (say) 30pps, in order to get it away. The alternative will be a cash offer from the existing institutional investors at (say) 60p.

How many PI’s will turn down the 60p, sure in the knowledge that their holdings will otherwise be materially diluted and trading below 30p?

It’s a tough sport.

Unless they’d like to acquire the remaining 30% of course. In which case, the lower the SP the better.

Not by me!

“@badsterman @obelix

Do you wake up in the morning and think, i know, i have lost money on this stock because i was in at the wrong time backing the wrong management team and decide that as you have lost money you would hate to see anyone else do well so want to be a pessimistic as possible and start posting negative comments to drag everyone down on a shareholder forum?.

Does it make you feel all warm and glowy to be this bloody pessimistic ? I should imagine its dam hard work.

As i say, i totally appreciate its no consolation if this stock rallies to a few quid if you are in at £11 but the recovery has to start somewhere, its a different business and a totally different risk/ reward ratio buying now at 40p than it was when investors were buying at £ 11

Good luck to you, as far as im concerned the new management team here are doing an amazing job to turn the business around and i have every confidence in that and the share price will follow.”

I think it's pretty clear that the 35% applies to the total CapEx budget. They've appointed someone (Reta Engenharia https://retaengenharia.com.br/en/) to undertake an independent review - with an update promised for mid Q4-2023.

Until the review is published I think this is bit of a punt, not for widows and orphans etc. Of course the 35% may well be mgmt sandbagging the increase, knowing that anything less than this + a revised financing package will be well received.

Interesting story,

Yes. The market is as thin as a mink.

We are so lucky to have you on 24/7/365 watch. Thank you for your service.

@SoleBoy - TD aren’t brokers. They are a marketing company that provides paid-for research.

@cj62 - in what way is this “manipulation”? The reporting rules allow for delayed disclosure of certain larger trades.

Who has behaved in a manipulative manner?

Which rule(s) have they broken?

Who has lost or gained as a result of their manipulative behaviour?

Isn’t it simply the case that you have an inadequate understanding of orders are filled and reported?

Not all orders are executed “at market”. Not all orders are filled by the Market Makers. The quoted prices are ONLY the prices at which RSP-routed online orders might be filled. Looking at the prices quoted and the trades reported on sites like LSE/ADVFN is like peering into a house through a narrow letterbox - you only have a restricted view, there are many parts you can’t see. It is naive to describe everything you cannot see through your letterbox as “manipulation”.

When shareholders have to be informed is a slightly grey area. If a formal, credibly resourced bid is tabled then they have to be told. There are some other circumstances (see below) that can also create an obligation to announce. But informal confidential approaches “We’re not making an offer Shaun, but if we were it might look a little like this etc etc” don’t have to be disclosed.

Here’s what the Code says:

An announcement is required:

(a) when a firm intention to make an offer is notified to the board of the offeree company by or on behalf of an offeror, irrespective of the attitude of the board to the offer;

(b) immediately upon an acquisition of any interest in shares which gives rise to an obligation to make an offer under Rule 9.1. The announcement that an obligation has been incurred should not be delayed while full information is being obtained; additional information can be the subject of a later supplementary announcement;

(c) when, following an approach by or on behalf of a potential offeror to the board of the offeree company, the offeree company is the subject of rumour and speculation or there is an untoward movement in its share price;

(d) when, after a potential offeror first actively considers an offer but before an approach has been made to the board of the offeree company, the offeree company is the subject of rumour and speculation or there is an untoward movement in its share price and there are reasonable grounds for concluding that it is the potential offeror’s actions (whether through inadequate security or otherwise) which have led to the situation;

(e) when negotiations or discussions relating to a possible offer are about to be extended to include more than a very restricted number of people (outside those who need to know in the parties concerned and their immediate advisers)

(f) when a purchaser is being sought for an interest, or interests, in shares carrying in aggregate 30% or more of the voting rights of a company or when the board of a company is seeking one or more potential offerors, and:

(i) the company is the subject of rumour and speculation or there is an untoward movement in its share price; or

(ii) the number of potential purchasers or offerors approached is about to be increased to include more than a very restricted number of people.

In simple terms…

A board which receives an approach is entitled to be satisfied that the bidder will be able to implement the offer in full (Rule 1). The target board is required to obtain competent independent advice (generally from a financial adviser and referred to as the Rule 3 adviser) on any bid and to make the substance of this advice known to its shareholders (Rule 3.1). The target board’s first direct contact with shareholders will be when it sends them the press announcement of the offer or possible offer (Rule 2.6). If the announcement is of a firm intention to make an offer, and the offer is not to be made on a recommended basis, the target board may decide at this stage not to advise shareholders to accept or reject the offer but instead tell them to do nothing, to retain their shares and await events.

@Sisu147, I preferred the post you made a few weeks ago regarding posters being more responsible:

“ Too many people raise expectations of the new and or inexperienced investors and as a consequence, many are hurting, strained emotions and so on.

We need to be more responsible for our comments here and be more collaborative in our message.

GGP has tremendous potential, but for those saying, "when this or that comes, the sp will rerate", is a little irresponsible and reckless.”

Yes, a clear statement on funding that should knock out some of the noise (from TW et al) about running out of cash in early 2024. They’ve got a year within which to deliver clinical results and a commercialisation pathway compelling enough to attract new buyers of the existing shares. Good work today from AS & team.