George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
I assume the 'within three years' was deliberately intended to exclude the additional $8m cash at 3.5 years :)
That is assuming the £3.6m comprises the initial $3.5m, plus $1m more for 3 years = $6.5m, converting USD to GBP and taking 67%?
Also forgetting the value that ARCM will get from 20% of whatever AAL discover after $75m of drilling in what has been proven to be one of the most prospective areas in Africa. I imagine they could raise with less than 10% dilution in a year or so at a MUCH higher share price and secure the company for the foreseeable future.
However, the one thing that fills me with the most amount of confidence regarding the future of ARCM is the massive effort from an orchestrated team of trolls, especially in the last couple of weeks. If they company wasn't worth it, or going nowhere, then that amount of effort would be pointless. Its only because ARCM has something special, that it gets so much attention. And only because news is imminent, is the trolling effort ramping up so desperately :)
The simple answer is that the trolls aren't actually shareholders. They lie and mislead about everything else - why would they tell the truth about being invested :)
All the genuine shareholders are on the ARCM Telegram group, which is helpful and informative - although not without impatience on timelines. There are several members who correspond with NvS, so we get regular (non-material) updates.
Everyone is very excited about the final government approvals on the deal, as only the tax agreement is outstanding. Licence transfer and competition authority are both signed off, according to the Zambian government. News could drop any day now, which is probably why the troll activity has peaked in the last week or two.
Thanks Peggy, I think I am going to spend all next week going through all the LSE boards for all the AIM shares in which I am not invested and posting the reasons for not being invested. That seems like a valuable use of my time.
Oh wait, I just checked and you only ever post on the ARCM forum. Why do you spend all your time posting about one share in which you aren't invested, yet you don't post on any shares where you are invested. Don't have you have any investments?
Checking further back (years!), it seems you have a long-running obsession with ARCM, which is a little sad TBH. Every time, it moves a step further (JV talks, JV terms agreement, JV signing, Gov approvals), you just change your negativity to the next phase and never admit you were wring about all the previous phases.
I'm actually starting to feel a little pity for you now. What a way to spend a life.
The deal was completed and signed on April 20th. Time since then is government approvals. Licence transfer signed last week by Zambian minister. Currently awaiting resolution on tax. Should be soon though as Vendanta tax deal was sorted last week.
There has been a drop today, but on minimal volume. Only 1 share in every 720 has been traded. So 99.86% of shares have been held. As usual, market makers taking advantage of slight selling pressure to get cheap shares off weak hands, so they can push it back up on news. TBH after mining minister comments last week and NvS confirmation of no placing, I am amazed at anyone selling - even if it is minimal.
The item II paragraph quote from the RNS is almost factually correct. The star you added and the erroneous conclusions associated with that star were not in the RNS (but you try to make it look like they are). A rather obvious attempt to mislead (as usual).
TBH, I have wasted too much time trying to counter the many trolls on this board. The deal is almost done so all your misdirection attempts will soon be irrelevant. I'm adding you to the green boxes. Feel free to have the last word.
The standard of de-ramping is getting worse. "Can't see it being 3p" - its been above 3p several times this week already.
Also, apparently there is going to be a placing because another stock which has one of the same shareholders just had a placing. That one is tenuous even for Ella.
As stated just a few messages below your post, the CEO stated in an email reply there are no plans for a placing. He's probably in the best position to judge. If you are in doubt - why not email him yourself and ask.
>> Unfortunately the equity has no redeeming aspect, to recommend purchase.
Does your positive divergence or bottom formation indicate when the current government approvals will be finalised, as I think that might have a tiny bit more impact on the price than the current chart.
Maybe at least do some minimal research before the clueless drive-by de-ramp?
I've noticed a surge in green boxes lately as well. . Highly unlikely to be AAL, as they would presumably employ competent de-rampers :)
It's more likely to be the usual collection of trolls, bitter ex-holders, people who have lost money elsewhere and hate anyone else doing well, etc.
The 'best' option I can find it is people who shorted on spread bets. While shorting and trolling is not exactly a sign of good character, it at least involves some motivation beyond spending your life attacking a company out of spite,
>> Since then - and the completion deal that completed nothing
You mean the *binding* deal signed on April 20th that is undergoing final government approvals right now, before AAL give us $15m cash and spend $75m on drilling our licences? That completion deal?
>> The whole concept is to remove the waste rock from the ore with a 64% reduction of the mass material that then goes for processing.
Yes, but you only end up processing half the original metal. Read the bottom line (Metal Recovery (%)) of the second table.
Quick summary.
1) The ore sorter rejects 64% of the ore, so that the remaining 36% has a grade 52% higher.
2) This means the processor only has to get through 1/3rd as much work.
3) It also means that half the original metal is rejected.
4) It also means, only half the original income if the processor runs at 1/3rd capacity.
Lets assume instead the processor runs at 2/3rds original capacity, because now with 50% better grade we are back to original income but with a 1/3rd reduction in processing costs. Sounds good?
However, a couple of considerations.
1) As you are rejecting two thirds of the ore, you need to dig up ore at double the previous rate in order to have the process running at 2/3rd the original rate
2) You also have a new step with the ore-sorter handling double what was originally planned for the processor
So the question is whether digging up twice as much ore and putting it through the sorter would cost more than the saving achieved by running the processor at 2/3rd capacity.