We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Longlad - I'm still not sure what you are saying that Ed is doing wrong exactly? It seems like the general consensus is we all get it was a bum investment for you personally as it didn't get you rich quick. But what bit of SEED's strategy is it that you think should change, and what exactly do you think is the problem with SEED (aside from you not getting rich quick off of it). Is it just because you don't believe that there will ever be a liquidisation of LEAP? Ever?
The impact of the war on SEED SP? Erm, it's a bit obvious the two distinct factors that result from this war that pushed the SEED share price down? I'd agree that if you bought this expecting a quick and large return, you won't have made a particularly good choice, particularly if you came in more than a year ago. But that's perhaps more on you rather than the SEED board. I can see a company with a clear strategy, good people on board, in a market that is expanding. Aside from the lack of quick profit, what's not to like? I'd be genuinely interested in insights that others would provide.
Published yesterday. Click the link, then ctrl f with 'hydorgen'. Two mentions identifying hydrogen as part of the strategy. We're going to see another 5-15% rise today I bet.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_1511
Apologies to all for changing the subject at all, but the general malaise around Ukraine and specific Leap angles affecting this share, this isn't entirely off-topic. My contention: Ukraine has essentially won this war whatever happens. The common enemy of Russia galvanising Ukrainian statehood, and the reaction of capitalist economies which will essentially destroy the Russian economy, Russia already talking about peace (who'd have thought this quick), even if it is from a completely impossible starting position. Putin has the power to 'sell' a peace, however it looks, to Russia given he controls the Russian media machine. It's common among us lot (investors/speculators) to look for evidence that supports the position that we wish to take. Putin can't sustain this war. God forbid that Ukraine becomes a Grozny, but from what Zelensky and other Ukrainians are saying, they're not going to surrender. And they will rebuild. We're going to get back to where we were, Leap will be sold, we'll be a £50M company and upward. What do you reckon?
AudibleEnergy - We're good at getting people support diplomatic efforts (ahem, via persuasion rather than pressure), either overt support or less than overt support, which is what direct Moroccan government intervention in this to fast track the bureaucracy would be. You'll recall the below economist article, pointing out a previous UK diplomatic coup against Putin. There is absolutely no reason for the Embassy in Morocco to pussyfoot in this. We're facing a barbaric opponent in Putin and need to do everything we can to put pressure on him and to relieve the impending food crisis caused by the potash short fall, short of starting World War 3. A phone call from the Emmerson board to the Embassy in Rabat pointing this out would be minimal effort: https://www.economist.com/europe/2018/03/23/britain-pulls-off-a-diplomatic-coup-against-russia-at-the-eu
It's easy to misinterpret an abstention. I'd say without a doubt, that fast tracking EML would be an easy diplomatic win for it in view of its abstention (essentially, saying to the US and the UK that it will help however it can, but at the same time not DIRECTLY alienating the Russian support for Western Sahara). Easy win for US and UK too - better to have secure supply of potash this way. UK Embassy Rabat, should, I imagine, be discussing this with the Moroccans right now. Impending food crisis, needs to be resolved, acknowledgement of realpolitik, and, by the way guys, is there a way you can help us resolve this fertiliser crisis? Oh, there is?! Well, we can still be friends then!
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2022/03/347380/why-morocco-should-support-the-us-led-unga-resolution-on-russia
I get there needs to be a process for everything, but at the same time, everything can be fast-tracked. If the UK Embassy in Morocco hasn't already pulled it's finger out and talking directly to the Moroccans to push for the strategic significance of this project (it isn't just about profit) so we avoid massive food shortages as a result of Russia's invasion, it's missing an obvious trick.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60623941
We're heading for another supply squeeze. No more Belarus potash. It's in the world's interest for this project to be fast tracked. I hope the Foreign Office (sanctions) are working with the Department for International Trade (promote UK business). Some easy wins for diplomacy here with HMG pointing out to the Moroccans that they can do their bit to further isolate Russia and Belarus, and pick up some good international trade contracts and contacts themselves if they pull their finger out and fast track this. Does anyone from the Embassy in Morocco read these posts? The Moroccans will love you for making them feel part of the world community, drivers for peace and democracy. Let's do it!
I have to admit that the absence of communication for a few weeks doesn't bother me at all. It's all about patience and a waiting game now. As I've said elsewhere, I welcome challenge about where this is going wrong, but in the absence of that, all I can see is a process we are going through. It's pretty normal. GLA.
That's a third of annual profits wiped out. H2 is poor economics because of a lack of economies of scale. Of course, all of a sudden, it looks a lot more attractive. Not only in relative cost terms to natural gas and oil, but also in terms of energy security. Watch this space. We're heading a lot quicker to a green economy. Some may complain a lack of orders. That isnt going to last for long.
The shore capital broker's note suggests a risk-adjusted valuation of 18p per share. This is triple today's SP. Factors standing in the way are: (1) ESIA, (2) completed financing and (3) agreement on land packages. Out of those three, I'd suggest (2) is perhaps the most complicated. Let's face it, the ESIA is expected to come through, and why wouldn't the land packages come through. Does anyone have any figures to hand on (2)?
I have to admit to scratching my head a bit. Even (2) I would have thought are likely to come through now Belarus and Russia are likely to be looked upon as less reliable suppliers of potash. EML has got to be a good bet for debt investors. We're only 30% of expected SP?
Any guesses on what event is going to trigger an influx of confidence aka buying of shares? I doubt the ESIA will make much difference because it doesn't seem in the balance in my eyes. It seems to be a given.
Thanks
LB: Sure, but the point I was responding to was what would happen with the SP after the LEAP IPO announced. There are some on this board who are saying they are invested, expecting a big spike in SP on the IPO, at which point they're selling. I'm saying that I don't expect much of a spike at all. And the reasons I give explain why I think that.
I'd offer a fourth scenario from the sale of LEAP - very little change in SP. LEAP already has it's intrinsic value. IPO'ing it will give it a more accurate valuation, and then SEED will get the cash to invest in cannabis companies. So why would anyone buy SEED (pushing the SP up) if the LEAP money isn't being distributed to shareholders? In fact, there will be people selling - as this board has shown! So quite possibly there'll be a virtually static SP or a drop! In effect, nothing will have changed (in terms of the company being more attractive to invest in) after the IPO is announced. Sure, there will be a more accurate valuation of the portfolio, but at the moment, our SP is around half of NAV anyway. Nav and SP have a tempestuous relationship. So even if NAV doubles, with no immediate cash return and only retail investors (hoping for a quick buck) on board or likely to get on board, it's unlikely to attract new investors who will understand that this is a cannabis stock. Where is the quick buck? The only thing that will really push the SP up is a decent focussed portfolio (cannabis) and positive sentiment around cannabis, the likes of which we last saw with the Kanabo IPO. I'm not convinced the LEAP IPO will bring the bonanza that some think. I'd sell now and go elsewhere tbh if that was my reason for being here. It isn't - my reason is that I can see the inevitable domino fall, starting from Germany this October. And this is a stupidly low price to get in at, to get low risk, well thought out exposure to a massive new market. GLA.
An average spend of £15 per product would bring a turnover of £750k a year. Modest and reasonable at this stage. The really interesting thing is the use of TikTok (and other social media). That's phenomenal and provides support to Ed's view of SouthWest Brands as being marketing masters.
Suzy2, As always, it seems there is more we agree about than disagree about. But ultimately, if it doesn't go through, the person making the decision will blame someone else. I, of course, don't know how that blame will look. But it certainly won't be the politician saying 'no' that will take the blame. I don't like anyone losing their money, so I wish you well nevertheless. All I'll lose is an opportunity to get in at this price. But on balance, there appears to be more risk in staying in and waiting for the decision, than just putting money in once the decision is made. Good luck if you believe it is a rubber stamp process that will be completed within four weeks.