REMINDER: Our focusIR Investor Webinar takes place TONIGHT with guest speakers from WS Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Sold 2x loss leading shares and added todays at 14.05p.
May have been early but lets hope the support continues: "Global shares rise as $30bn lifeline for US bank eases fears of imminent collapse and Treasury secretary, Janet Yellen, says US banking system ‘is sound’.
Still "standing by" for Chariot to confirm to ii's and us) that they have secured the finances for the gas project(s) AND provide some clarity on the continued funding of their renewable / hydrogen ambitions, its not as if they can use the gas project funding to move those other ambitions forward nor will they have income for 2yrs (at least).
So HOW are they funding such above ambitions: How far are they away from generating any income from the mining renewable projects?
Lets hope the Bod's are NOT waiting for a share rise, and then another share placing to bring us up to 1 billion shares!
This would NOT be perceived well by the market or many of us....all down to managements financing strategy, which they are NOT disclosing.
AP is not unfamiliar with over extending on debt: that would indicate some significant experience (lessons learnt) on keeping control of future debt management.
https://www.miningmx.com/news/diamonds/41033-petras-founding-chairman-adonis-pouroulis-steps-down-from-board-after-23-years/
Chariot MUST start to supply more information on the development path and financing intentions for the other arms of the company (as well as what were waiting for on the gas projects of course).
Does any one else agree that it is too vague??
GLA
Rgds Sft
Thank you BDC
1. So we are confirming the company continues to value the company at 18p.
2. FEED confirmed completed and they have moved on to Engineering, Procurement and Construction ("EPC") confirmed via RNS.
The above indicates there has been nothing disclosed that has reduced the value worth of the company
Therefore we could then determine
Either there is some bad news hiding in the shadows that will totally undermine the project? Not a good idea to move onto EPC and the directors would face being accused of deceiving the market. This is a UK company.
Or
4. The market slump is affecting the current share price as you have raised)
I am leaning toward No.4 and actually look at this as a real buying opportunity unless the market has more fragility in it.
Gas as you have said remains extremely required in Morocco irrespective of the high current demand only being covered currently by increase LNG vessel supply?
Rgds Sft
Something I did not do nor do I think it was discussed on the bb
Was the actual share value that Chariot allocated to purchase of the "Water company"
From RNS and Chariot website:
"Initial consideration payable on completion of the sales agreement is US$0.5 million in Chariot Ordinary
Shares based on the 30-day VWAP prior to financial closing of the Djibouti project (representing
2,267,694 shares). Deferred consideration also payable in Chariot Ordinary Shares up to US$0.5 million (representing a maximum of 2,267,694 shares), is payable within a 24-month period dependent on
achieving financial close on further projects. It is intended that the Ordinary Shares issued under the
initial and deferred consideration will be subject to a lock-in period of 12 months.
So what price was allocated per share?
I ask because I must be inaccurate in what my figure comes out as???!!!
I would expect it to be (as per the last fund raise) as 18p but that not what I come out with.
Rgds Sft
Hi BB,
You make an intresting point regarding knowing when to enter or exit a investment.
If you are a trader and had entered at 10p then selling after doubling(+) your investment at 26p then you would have done well.
The trouble is that an private investor may feel that addtional investors may be "piling in" having recognised the future potential of the company. This could be seen as applicable to CHAR.
By not being able to clearly see if institutional investors were part (at the time) of that the recent rise up to 26p (late April 22) it could nowvretrospectively have been more private traders (79.6% of company held currently by "private investors") comming in and happy to trade for example 50% of their investment......but the suprise subsequent share fund raising of May 22 looks to have fully undermined the continuation of that growth.
Note: in 1 year sp has raised by 57% but share dilution has been above 52%
Note: it can be recognised that this funding was to secure cash flow to completion of FEED (and I sincerely hope to the completion of project financing and or farm out? But none the less the resultant share dilution has undermined that SP and any SP growth purley due to that % dilution and possibley stalked stalled any increase from the (current) reported 2% (up from 1.7% a few months agao) of ii investments in CHAR.
If you came in at and around 20+ then it would be frustrating but brokers are rating this higher than 26p.
I again belive (as many) are that due to as previously aired: as the company has never made a return since formation, failed on the Nambia drilling but bought the Anchois/Linux blocks, raised funds again for the drilling campaign, raised more to buy the rest of the Rissana block, raised to make it to the current position and RAISED again to buy the Singapore water container company......ii are in no way comming in until the company has proved it can finance the gas project.....is there any concern that we do not have a clearly disclosed finance /business plan for the renewables, that we are run buy a ex miner ( many AIM listed mine companies have historical been big money pits, being from OZ Greatland Gold is a current good example).
I came in purley on the gas project...and still hope it will achieve the returns some hope for.
Note: Simpley Wall St latest report has us as "fair value" at 259p!!!!!????? not sure how they calculate that!!!
There remains imo lack of significant clarity on the renewable side and how that is to be safely funded.
We REMAIN a long way from gas production SO how do the BoDs inte Ted to fund the renewable arms of the CHAR business with the current funds???
All my own musings and using Simple Wall Street reports as reference to numbers quote.
Rgds Sft (Standing by for RNSs on Gas contracts and signed farmout/ financing and some clear financing for the rest).
Hello Snott,
Jim's valuation is (I belive) an attempt (and appreciated) to base valuation on pure expenditure vs return valuation.Look at Simpley Wall St valuation (bit crazy I will admit).
Your comment .." I think I will hold on until Char starts paying dividends from whatever share of Anchois and wider Lixus licence they keep hold of" is a bit risky.
When has AP ever indicated (I may have missed it so apologise if so) a dividend is thier intent?
I wrote in several questions on the last qna webinar several of which were answered several of which were ignored....one was a (ignored) conformation that the BoDs were NOT going to implement a re-rate (rather than "will there be a buy back" that AP laughed at and said "we have to make a profit first" (ignoring the former) on the shares to bring down the nearly billion shares we have in issue presently ( gone up again to buy the Singapore 2yr old container based "water company"
I again say all of this is tied into why the ii's are not buying our 75% privately owned shares. Anchois/ Linux/ Rissana is the only commercial game being financially played out...based against a CEO miner who who heads up a unprofitable ( since formation) AIM company.
Jim's assessment is probably very realistic based on facts rather than speculative ii (lacking) sentiment.
All imo
In deep, have advised several to buy as a speculative ISA investment...the ii'' are not such risk taker (they have investment criteria to adhere to, its a job) or speculative.
Kindest
GLA
Rgds Sft
Hi Nick IMO: Financing, financials (Anchois/Rissana slightly more calculable but the renewable/hydrogen arm could appear to still look like a energy wash with NO clear financial plan), dilution 52% last year, current income generation and remaing cash runway all reflect the actual worth...not potential.
Consider also: if an ii wanted to invest should they do it through buying share with the above known/unknowns, wait for more certainty or wait for the bonds on a financing project raise (not sure what the BoDs were telling investor's on their recent "tour"?)
Just my opinions but the GAS project (NO idea about the OTHERS) is a good one POTENTIALLY: Every one is waiting for the project numbers, FULLY signed contracts and to see the money/repayment terms
GLA
Rgds Sft
Thank for posting full article KB.
Very interesting that we have been given reconfirmation regarding the potential for CHAR to use the collaboration model: ".....envisages SLB operating the facility for a certain number of years...."
This was raised (by the BoDs) about a year ago (aprox) and has not been much muted since but I picked up on it when raised and does give them an excellent negotiation position when coupled with /if SocGen are able to raise the necessary *financing.
*Note: and long term security of any debt I.e. it can get sold on see: https://www.reuters.com/article/premier-oil-investor-arcm-idINL8N29C19U)
As per (before) I remain in the farm in camp (for multiple reasons) but the BoDs are not allowing themselves to be forced down just one avenue, which could indicate decent experience at CFO level...Premier oil went under due to just such failings (with other factors I.e. PoO and poor management).
Hopefully all will become clear very soon.
Rgds Sft
Windfall tax or increasing in times of significant high growth? Never considered, never part of HM Gov strategy?
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/26/the-history-of-windfall-taxes-who-used-them-and-why
The implementation of the directors incentive, expensive and poor drilling campaign, failed and unrealistic take over attempt and now another long drilling campaign to keep flow rates up.
It all hanging on WoS stake increasing.
Rgds Sft
Have to go back to September 2021 to get these prices. Nice value add for the LTH's of the company shares Mr Austin.
Old supporters could be starting to think they should reduce some of their exposure to the moves being played out by the BoDs nowadays?
Rgd Sft
Hi doodle8, thank you for the post.
Particularly interesting: ".....currently in detailed discussions with potential farm in partners and we understand the process is COMPETITIVE."
Do you have the link for the research note, intrested in reading and the artical date.
Kind Rgds Sft
I think it was a good thing that the Anchois find and the BoDs securing the subsequent services of SS7 and Schlumberger was done when it was.
https://www.offshore-energy.biz/subsea-7-sees-highest-order-intake-in-last-9-years/
In addtion that meeting (leaked) regarding the high importance (to Moroccan Gov bodies and contractors) of maintaining and achieving timeline deadlines for all parts of the project really was/is true.
RNS on Gas contracts and project financing (farm in partner, banks or VC investors must be close (post FEED).
Note: You can bet the team are keeping an eye on the rig count too.
https://rigcount.bakerhughes.com/intl-rig-count
Wonder what both SS7 and Schlumberger are saying about equipment supply chain deliver timelines.
Did AP mentions anything in reply to such equipment procurement before sanction or was it a BB poster mentioning something about securing such by order before sanction?
Rgds Sft
Hi Fraserd, I have a bit of past experience via Rockhopper and Premier (not a good example of a sucessful project btw) but premier did issue a RNS.
But the "oracle" that is google is always a good try: quick example
https://www.google.com/search?q=Front+end+engineering+completion+RNS
Kindest Sft
Hi KB,
I belive the completion of FEED is worthy of an RNS as it would be regarded as a key project mile stone.
But it is only my opinion (as it would be Jims)
If an RNS is issued it should detail the move to FID and a prospective time line
The other 2 (Gas contracts and financing) could all be bundled into a FID time line but it would then expose the project financing status as undecided and or unclear....it would be that investors are demanding clear costs on FEED before commiting (no MOU's at this point thats for sure).. so IMO FEED completion is of significance.
Rgds Sft
Just my usual musings but......having come in late (directly after the Anchois drilling) I am not therefore a CHAR veteran: imo and looking back, the failed Nambia ventures obviously was the demise of cash and share price but Linux/Anchois was also ( fortunately) purchased with some of that remainng cash.
Then comes the rise of AP and the end of others (LTH will know better?) tenure in CHAR.
There was share issue funding for the drilling campaign and the eventual discovery (or some may say greater belief than what Repsol (sellers) believed was there?)
My initial entry (post drill) proved to be soundbites subsequent SP purchases less so, as I saw that CHAR still needed further funding and raised this but listened to some poster(s) (my own fault) thatcherism fully funded. Looking at the cashreserves I should have known this was not the case...but also in fairness none of us WERE aware of AP/BoDs intended path in further field purchase, addtional pace and support/ finances toward the renewables Arms OR that they were going to fully fund FEED (rather than get a partner in immediately) this direction led to further fund raising via shares and a 52% dilution, that no investors were planning ( I would have held off averaging in and subsequently UP knowing this was the plan ).
SO imo the current LTHhave lost mostly (again only imo) due mainly to Nambia but like me (the newbie) again due to the share issue funding and the BoDs lack of transparency on their plans Some did though hence the sp drop before the last fund raise) .
We still find ourselves especially in the dark on farm out and / or bond issue or banking finance for the project AND any part of the financing of the renewables.
Couple this with CHAR never having been profitable the institution are staying WELL out for now...hence (imo) our sp status.
It will soon become clear if AP is going to getthe right deals or (concerningly) do some (I may be too suspicious) finance deal he is involved with too?
That's why I want to see a snr operator involved in Anchois/Linux.
All musing and speculations as usual.
Rgds Sft