Member Info for SussexEngineer

Shouldhavedone, what a good prediction you made!

T1995, Brian answered that during the 1 hour Q & A session.

It is not easy and would require duplication of infrastructure to achieve. He largely dismissed it as a concept.

So why SE?

Gotabesirius, why am I strange character?

I work on the periphery of the fertilizer business and been to potash and phosphate mines and operations, as well as urea and nitrate processing plants. Having dealt with clients in the sector I appreciate the cyclic nature of the business, as well as the world events that create fluctuations. I appreciate how China act as a single entity to drive hard price deals, at the detriment of the individual businesses, who for legal reasons cannot act in unison for fear of issues surrounding cartels. I also have worked for 3 large mining companies in Brazil and other operations that are in the commodity sector.

I am not an expert on mineraliser fertilisers but appreciate the importance of Brazil as an agricultural exporter and why there is an ambition to be self sufficient in fertilsers sooner rather than later. I review HMI because it accounts for such significant proportion of my ISA portfolio and luckily I average at less than 5.5p despite buying in originally at 19p ages ago. Like you I got burnt on Sirius but it taught me to read and digest good and bad reviews, for both type of contributors I appreciate the input.

Before everyone jumps down my throat, I am basing this at the time of the November RNS statement, when the share price was around 6p.

This is an overall $300k loss to share holders, through payments and dilution.

Smalleyus, how astute you were flagging up this issue yesterday and today. The company have produced an RNS on the subject and are no longer pursuing this project. Monies paid up to now are lost but no further payments are to be made.

The pilot will also be there to allow process modification trials, when the main plant is operating. This will help fine tune the process, allow major modifications to be tested, in advance of implementation. As RBW are a joint licencor of the K-Tech continuous ion exchange and continuous ion chromatography separation technology, they will want to benefit and support other opportunities to expand the technology, under licence.

Johnpwh, maybe you are right but the experts don't agree with you. A vast array of publications and research papers state that Brands survive best in recessions. In fact the brands that Haleon own are in the best sector for survival. See

https://brandfinance.com/insights/how-brands-can-overcome-crises

I draw everyone's attention to the table "Anticipated Loss in Brand Value by Sector in Response to Related Covid-19 Crises". This is no longer a Covid crisis but evidence is in plenty of sources. Here is a £2.69 book that can educate us all:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Brand-Success-Worlds-Brands-Survive/dp/0749462876

If you are cheapskate you can always read the summary provided by Amazon.

Boxthefox, I thought GSK were transparent in the prospectus, on the debt and dividends. Please read page 12 for the debt provision and dividend payments to GSK as Balancing Dividend, Pre-Demerger Dividend and Sweep-up Dividend.

As for future dividends they spell this out on page 15.

Certainly on the debt there has been plenty of material published on the internet, that GSK was to load Haleon with a certain debt and they flagged this as a concern.

I don't believe so. The profit and dividend was accumulated under the GSK ownership. The trading statement indicates that both GSK and Pfizer were paid a dividend by Haleon. I would be surprised to see a dividend after less than a month of trading.

To keep you all in the loop and to save Abcam the hassle of responding to everyone here is my response from them:

"...the Board of Directors have decided to pursue a sole listing on NASDAQ and will continue consulting with shareholders for approval to delist from AIM at a General Meeting later this year. Today, our shares are convertible on a 1:1 basis from AIM to American Depository Shares (ADSs) listed on NASDAQ. If we were to go through the process of delisting, in line with precedent, we anticipate there to be mechanisms in place to facilitate this conversion and support existing AIM ordinary shareholders.

We will continue to communicate with all shareholders in the coming months and will provide further details of the impact and the options available to all shareholders, including the publication of a circular which will cover all material information on the specifics on the matter, ahead of an expected shareholder vote later in the year."

Trouts, I contacted my provider and they said they are waiting on further information from Abcam before offering advice and actions.

Alas_Smith, yes it does. Thank you.

Transactional costs (broking and currency) I guess will increase whether it is in an ISA or not as it does for my company SAYE scheme, where they are on the NYSE.

We know that they still need shareholders approval to pass this but it is likely that management will not have gone out on a limb without having the buy in of major shareholders. Though I know that a similar venture by Unilever ended up as a fiasco where the UK delisted eventually ended up as a Dutch delisting, when there was a major shareholder revolt.

Have to be honest I don't want an argument, all I want is a fair deal and I have large concerns this might not happen. It might be a case of watching this space and see how the press and major investors react to the proposal. Have gone to Abcam Investor relations website to ask questions, as I am so shocked. With the Nasdaq element it is almost as though the tail is wagging the dog.

I have seen that Abcam are to go sole listing on Nasdaq and therefore to cancel the Company's shares on AIM. I have not been in this position before and I am not on face value too happy about this. I am a LTSH of this stock and have been happy with the history and overall performance. This though is a kick in the teeth. The statement does not say what is happening to existing shareholders on the UK stock market.

Clearly this is a voluntary delisting, as they are still to trade on the Nasdaq and the question comes what happens to us. Will they offer to buy the shares off us at what could be a derogatory price? Paid a market price from the listing on the Nasdaq for the extra shares they sell to compensate? Offer us a deal that we can't refuse? Perhaps transfer our stock holding to the US, though I don't know how this affects an ISA? Leave us to trade over the counter?

If any of you have been through this on another company please let me know and let me know what happened? Were you better off, worse off or it balanced out?

I was most impressed with the webinar. All shareholders should listen to the 50+ minutes. Brian came across professional, personal and detailed, where he could be.

I took Q1 sales as an outlier and Q2 fell in line with sales expectations based on the Ukrainian conflict.
Expansion of Arupua is not planned nor easy to achieve. The absolute max output will be 320kt, unless a significant duplication of infrastructure takes place.
They will use Arupua to grow synergized products, initially limestone then phosphates, without having to dilute share holder value.
The lead time between a sale contract and ultimate payment can be a seasons growing cycle.
Different buyers have different purchasing/borrowing and price needs.
Both Volume and sales pricing is rising.
Profit margin is about 75%.
Q3 is anticipated to continue to be the largest sales/production period.

I congratulate all those who bought in at the 9p level, unfortunately I failed to act but my portfolio is already heavily weighted on HMI.

Chique, Q1 sales were a 689% increase compared to the same period last year and Q2 was a 165% increase . Hence my comment. As the Russian invasion of Ukraine largely impacted Q2 I was at least hoping for a similar robust sales performance to continue.

trading4good, who are you calling the trolls? We all know about smalleyus, so the plural concerns me.

I am hoping it is not me, if it is please read my past posts on HMI. Even here I tried to provide a balanced statement. I saw both the financial report for 2021 and the H1 2022 sales. Was not overly happy with both. I was waiting on the results to make a decision to increase my participation. Part of me was hoping that the Q1 sales growth would on a par with those of Q2 and it wasn't. I was hoping that the lack of potash delivery from Belarus through Lithuania would have caused the Brazilian farmers to rush to HMI, as an alternative. In fact the supply chain problems should have been been more beneficial for HMI in Q2 than Q1.

I am a LTH and work on macro economic issues. I am not close enough to the company to use it as a play.

Everything has a price level. The upset appears to be the constant draining of money by senior management and the lack of continued sales in Q2, compared to the great performance in Q1. The hidden good news is that the company has written off the legal case, at the request of the auditors, that could come back in and boost income at a later date.