RE: MT DFS - why have they not published it?4 Jul 2023 16:39
There are a few inferences there SpikeyJ, which you are choosing to make. Aa ever, it's unclear.
It doesn't say there is no buyer, and it says they don't know when further announcements might be.
Taken on their own, sure, what you are inferring sounds bad.
But...
If there is nothing likely to happen on that front, why choose not to start mining via the sinosteel arrangement?
If NDAs have expired as no buyer, then why no DFS? You argue because it's bad news but it may well not be.
The guy resigning is apparently as his job is done so again, this could be a good thing.
It could be that the buyer is still around, but won't progress until the war issue resolves. They may require the NDAs still to be there lest they pull interest completely.
Again, all speculation, much like some of your points, and purposefully optimistic as a counter to your view.
Again, the reality will be somewhere in the middle, as judged by the muted market reaction (either way)
I agree, the cash position looks somewhat low, and issuing of shares, whilst not ideal, is standard practice for AIM companies. The better question, imo, is why was this standard resolution not included last year?
The loans to the subs are repayable on demand, so perhaps there is available cash there if required, or of course it could be all spent already. Or they may sell the concentrate.
Ultimately, I expect that many investors are asking these questions, either via email or via calls, or intend to at the AGM.
Another good question, which seems to be forgotton, is why was the report released "late".