Ryan Mee, CEO of Fulcrum Metals, reviews FY23 and progress on the Gold Tailings Hub in Canada. Watch the video here.
Buy more Bitcoin, analyst tells institutions as $257M in BTC leaves Gemini
Stock-to-flow creator PlanB suggests that now is the time to continue accumulating, with selling pressure fading fast.
2:58 today
Buy more Bitcoin, analyst tells institutions as $257M in BTC leaves Gemini MARKETS NEWS
Institutions should start buying Bitcoin (BTC) again, leading analyst PlanB has said as one exchange sees a fresh $250-million withdrawal.
In a tweet on Tuesday, PlanB argued that conditions were now right for buyers to continue accumulating BTC with confidence.
PlanB: “Probably time” for Q2 buying
BTC/USD had seen a lack of momentum over the weekend, culminating in a dive to near $56,000. With resistance near all-time highs of $61,700 now at its lowest since the time that level was first reached, it may now pay to be bullish.
In addition, multiple on-chain indicators suggest that sellers are exhausted. This capitalizes on an existing narrative that favors hodling, not short-notice trading or selling, as the prime strategy for Bitcoin investors.
“Now that all Pi-cycle, Wave, Rainbow and NUPL fans have sold their bitcoin, it is probably time for institutions to resume buying into Q2,” PlanB wrote, highlighting four indicators.
Of these, the so-called “Rainbow” price chart, which categorizes spot price in terms of investor sentiment, highly favored hodling this week, as well as buying more BTC at current prices.
An interesting comparison is with the top of the two previous bull markets in late 2013 and late 2017. Then, Rainbow signaled a bubble-like top forming, with the implication that hodlers should take profit. Since current readings are far from such a peak, the indicator suggests that the current price gains still have a long way to go before the bull cycle top is in.
BTC/USD Rainbow price chart. Source: Blockchain Center
As Cointelegraph reported, PlanB’s stock-to-flow Bitcoin price models call for $100,000 and more this year, with as much as $576,000 and higher hitting during the current halving cycle ending in 2024.
Big outflow spikes remain
Meanwhile, proof that institutions are still interested may already be in.
On Monday, professional client-focused exchange Gemini, saw $257 million in BTC leave its holdings in a 10-minute period.
These large outflows have characterized recent months and, along with the success of instruments such as the Purpose Bitcoin ETF, hint that demand shows no sign of stopping at near $60,000 per coin.
Gemini exchange outflows annotated chart. Source: Lex Moskovski/ Twitter
Across exchanges, reserves of BTC are still falling, down below 2.3 million as of this week.
Bitcoin exchange reserves vs. BTC/USD chart. Source: CryptoQuant
According to data from on-chain monitoring resource Glassnode corroborated by Whalemap, buyer support more broadly is continuing to cement itself at $57,000, reducing the likelihood of deeper price dips.
It was long ago as October 2019 that the then Mines and Mining Development Deputy Minister, Engineer Polite Kambamura, confirmed the successful acquisition of the EPO by Premier African Minerals to ZBCtv news.
Prem had by then been taken through the several judicial stages of the formal EPO process and successfully met all the necessary requirements. Hence the announcement.
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiykuOCk5zvAhUtUBUIHdIAC9w4ChDF9AEIaDAH&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.chronicle.co.zw%2Fpremier-gets-epo-for-mat-north-projects%2F&usg=AOvVaw1ZYqsZzw4dv7-Al7T-Z4mv
It turns out whilst the Deputy Ministers press release back then may have been correct his statement was slightly incomplete and therefore premature.
Prem was one of about forty applicants applying for EPO’s and in the process overall a number of objections were raised. Prem had two but they were minor and satisfactorily dealt with.
But there were other objections that raised shortfalls in the Mining Law that gave cause for the Government to want to make amendments to the Mining Laws. Specifically to protect the rights of native Artisanal Miners that are so important to the country.
The current Mining Laws were too vague when it came to the demarcation and size of the Artisanal Miners pegging rights was just one example. So what followed was a step out Judicial Process to amend the Laws.
The EPO’s couldn’t be signed by the President and issued until the lengthy judicial process of amending statute had been completed and that takes us to where we are today. It’s finally been done. Well almost.
Just as in the UK there are certain events that must be Gazetted by law. Bringing finality to the EPO process being the one in this case. Whilst it’s a formality nevertheless it has to be done before the awards can be issued to the applicants.
When I first heard about it my best guess was that the amendments would have been at least promulgated if not enshrined in the new Mining Laws by January this year. But from what’s been said it would appear Covid -19 has delayed matters. I’ve been adding to my holding since then.
However to me it now looks very likely Prems award is likely to be Gazetted as soon as practically possible in line with what was announced in Parliament last week.
AIMHO
1 of 3
Just a reminder on Zulu whilst we await news.
I like to think of the drilling campaign on the current Licensed Area as having been carried out in three phases even though they are all connected and have not been separated by Prem in it's RNS's. It makes it less complicated and easier for me to understand. So using my own nomenclature then Phases 1,2 &3.
Phase 1 I regard as the work done to get to Prems PEA or Scoping Study as some prefer to call it. As all fairly well documented and recorded as it needed to be by BARA to comply with the requisite SAMREC code. The SS was derived from an analysis of the drill results if just 15% of what became called “the main strike”.
The SS told us that over 20mt’s of the Pegmatites identified on the main strike contained 1.06% Li2O in roughly one third Petalite and two third Spodumene proportions. It also gave us the grades for the two types which were particularly high in the Spodumene Pegmatite and told us the lithium had a particularly low iron content which made it a world class premium quality.
All fairly standard stuff but just to emphasise it was very minimalist as it only represented about 15% of the main strike.
The campaign continued along the main strike to its end. This is what I regard as Phase 2. At that point and from the logs Prem then gave us the overall estimated Pegmatite resource of up to 160mt's of grades around 1.o6% and we see that estimate being used quite often. Again all relatively straightforward and easy to follow.
2 of 3
What seems to be less well known or perhaps understood however is that in Prems eagerness to delineate the total resource under its license Prem carried on drilling. This is what I call Phase 3.
One of the strikes discovered during this phase was simply an extension to the main strike . But there were three further strikes discovered and these were categorized as Step Out Zones which were entirely separate to the main strike.These were appropriately called SOZ's 01 to 03.
The Pegmatites in SOZ's 01 to 03 were shown to contain predominantly very high grade Li2O in Spodumene with very little Petalite and Lepidolite encountered. Highly encouraging as it affected the sites proportionality and potential and well as improving the average grade of 1.06%.
Assay results from ZDD-45 were particularly noteworthy if not world beating where a length of the core was found to contain a bonanza grade in excess of 4% Li2OGeorge Roach is quoted as saying in an RNS at the time “Not often is a grade of 4.24% Li2O seen in drill core” An understatement if ever there was one.
There would have been Tantalum present too in all the cores as it’s so prevalent. But to date it's overall extent is undisclosed and rarely mentioned despite it’s very high value. Except to say lately you may have heard it said that Prems engineer believes the Tantalum is present in such quantity that it’s of such value it’s likely to cover all the mines Cash Costs. If that’s right it deserves never to be taken lightly. Grades as high as 200ppm were identified in the SS.
The additional strikes identified in SOZ’s 01 to 03 along with the main strikes extension ran up to the boundaries of the current licensed area and by interpolation far beyond.
This as well as a “walkover survey” of the adjoining land by experts could well have encouraged Prem to apply for the EPO now awaited.
3 of 3
In one of the Proactive interview you may recall GR also saying that he believed the additional EPO area was on strike as it was quite significant which I thought was quite an encouraging comment.
If you take the additional area of over 20,000 ha under application as having a similar density and grade of Li2O then Zulu if developed would almost certainly prove to be the largest hard rock lithium mine on earth. Not just that but one of the highest quality too. That's how big and valuable the lithium development at Zulu has the potential to be.
What the EPO area will do is give Prem more flexibility and options on how it develops the asset and obviously a more profitable mine not simply because of the potential in Au etc that’s likely but simply because of the economy of scale. It’s like to mean the difference between a mine producing Concencentrate and one producing Carbonate.
The price of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent is currently at a little over $11,000/t - an increase of over 40% in the two months this year having fallen from around $20’000/t at its height a few years ago. Many experts believe we will see a new high in the not too distant future as lithium and related commodities start on what's being called a new super-cycle.
Based on reasonable assumptions the Pegmatite with Prems current license area should be at least 250mt’s at an average grade of over 1.1%. That puts Li2O there at 2.50mt’s. The conversion from Li2O to LCE is 2.473 which produces 6.18mt’s of LCE. It follows that the in-ground value of lithium under current license at a price of $20k/t would be a staggering $123.600.000.000 or thereabouts. Not to forget the area of the EPO is around 57 times bigger!
There’s just a little more patience needed, that's all here! I firmly believe the Mining Affairs Committee has recommended and approved Prems EPO application. All that remains now is the President to sign it!
All IMHO .
My personal view is that the “Chinese New Year” has been a factor that’s been weighing on BTC’s price over the last few days. Just as it has in previous years.
The CNY starts tomorrow but the populous would have needed most of its cash in advance of the event.
It looks to me as though the worst of the selling is over and we're now seeing BTC driving for new highs as it’s being influenced by the greater events and market forces the most savvy analysts anticipated.
A $900m Market Cap will quickly underwrite BTC’s value now with $1trn soon to follow. That’ll be some newsworthy milestone to grab the headlines!
Scaremongering?
Bitcoin fell as much as 11% today hitting its lowest level in nearly three weeks, as the popular cryptocurrency was hit with a double whammy that jolted faith in its user base.
First, Janet Yellen, President Joe Biden's nominee for treasury secretary, suggested during her confirmation hearing on Tuesday that lawmakers "curtail" the use of Bitcoin because of its use in illicit activities.
And second, an unconfirmed report from BitMEX Research on Wednesday suggested that a critical flaw called "double spend" had occurred in the Bitcoin blockchain.
Double spend is when someone is able to spend the same bitcoin twice. It is a feared and dire scenario for the digital asset, and the blockchain was thought to have solved the issue when Satoshi Nakamoto published the Bitcoin white paper in 2009.
Let's take Tays guidance of ncyt’s current monthly sales figures of between 20m & 30m units (Twitter 28.10.20) . Lets call it 25m units/month.
Now let's take VanV’s guidance on the average selling price per unit of $10 (LSE BB 28.10.20). For ease of maths let's call it £7.50/unit.
From these two fundamentals we can arrive at a ncyt’s monthly revenue of £187.5m (25m x £7.50) and an annualised revenue of £2.25bn (25m x £7.50 x 12)
Research tells us that net profit is at least 50% give or take. Other terms such as "freecashflow" and "earnings" have the same meaning as net profit and they're always a key fundamental used in valuations. So by my calculations ncyt currently has monthly "earnings" of around £93.75m and annualised “earnings” of around £1.125bn.
There are many ways Analysts may to value ncyt. Views on the one that applies a "p/e multiplier" have been expressed before on here. It’s known by Analysts as the “earnings metric method” and it’s probably the one that’s considered favourite now that it’s recognised that C-19 and therefore testing will be with us for some time yet.
But it is just one of three common appraisal methods used by Analysts and the others shouldn’t be dismissed including an easy one that's based on assets and one done by benchmarking against similar companies in the space.
Professional Analysts or rather the better ones will use several methods to value businesses and then take a weighted average. The real value of anything though will always be what another party or suitor is prepared to pay for it and who knows how close we are to that. Rumours abound!
There's research and an argument to say ncyt should attract a price to earnings ratio of around 6. That would stand comparison against its peers. But let's be over conservative and use a p/e ratio of just 3 for this purpose.
So my maths tells me that ncyt’'s current Market Cap should be £1.25bn earnings x 3 p/e ratio which is £3.75bn. There's currently 70m shares in issue and therefore it's share price should be 7300p give or take.
If you do a straight line projection to the end of Q2 2021 assuming constant growth you should simply add 50% to the MC & SP figures.
The data used here isn't mine. All I've done is assembled them and explained the principle. They're on the public domain to research and check. Do that before dismissing them.
The market is well behind the curve on this stock in my view. Understandably as it's growth of 20,000% has been rapid and relentless since January. It's unique in so many ways and is performing in ways as most of the market struggles to take it in and many onlookers resort to rubber-necking in disbelief.
AIMHO
There's a plasma donation and research programme in place.
Plasma from blood donated by people can and will save lives!
It's far more valuable than many of us can ever imagine!
So how do we know if someone will have antibodies. We........
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiDyNiMztbqAhVTr3EKHYBXBG8QFjAAegQIBBAB&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nhsbt.nhs.uk%2Fcovid-19-research%2Fplasma-programme%2F&usg=AOvVaw2bbDqj3abavm4_9d6sdWe1
Good luck everyone!
Please listen to this guys from about 18 minutes in:-
https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-update-first-ministers-speech-16-july-2020/
This isn't going to be stopping any time soon!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53066177
1 of 4
Guys there are many ways of valuing Novacyt and views on the one that applies a "p/e multiplier" being exchanged on here recently. I recognise the method as one based on using an earnings metric and it’s one of my favourites.
It's just one of three of the most common ones used by Analysts. The others being one that's asset based and one that's based on benchmarking against similar companies in the space. Those producing COVID -19 Antigen tests that is.
Professional Analysts or rather the better ones will use several methods to value businesses and then take a weighted average. Of course the real value of anything material will be what another party is prepared to pay for it. In other words more of a commercial approach taking expert valuations as references.
A commercial offer from a suitor may be more than or less than an Analysts valuation. As often happens an initial offer may be less but may not be the best one the offeror may make. Almost invariably it’s not.
Some will argue the earnings metric method is inappropriate in Novacyts case. But support for that argument can only come from two principles in my view.
The first principle is the one that says the demand for Novacyts tests will fall off substantially in a relatively short time once the pandemic passes.
The second principle says that Novacyts fundamentals are too unstable to use it whilst it's in its ramping up state.
It pains me very much to say that under the first one demand is likely to exceed supply for some considerable time to come. This virus isn't going away anytime soon unfortunately and until we can be it’s master all we can do is play catch-up. Before the pandemic is over we're likely to see hot-spots flare up in areas where the "R" value creeps above 1. These areas will call for a high degree of testing approach under local authorities guidance. We're already seeing it in fact.
2 of 4
When and if the pandemic subsides I believe we'll see epidemics springing up around the globe. In our fight against it we are going to need Antigen and Antibody tests along vaccine and drugs. Every one will have a rightful place in our toolboxes.
When the disease is under control demand will not just come down to how many tests will be needed for testing per sa. It’ll be more to do with “capacity needed” in readiness for Governments and Institutions etc to cope with further outbreaks or even another strain.
Antibody tests have an eighteen month shelf life and the cost in economic terms and human lives through being caught out again in future is unthinkable. So I firmly believe we'll see a stock of both Antigen and Antibody tests being kept in reserve at all times across the world. Supply will struggle to match testing demand let alone provide sufficient to replenish stocks in my view. Do some fag packet numbers and you will be surprised.
On the second principle it’s true to say the SP is volatile and profit isn't constant just yet.
As with any newly producing company there will be a point when it establishes an "optimised and steady state" but for Novacyt we may yet see a series of these and the business could well be developed in phases.
Understanding the development path isn't too difficult . Novacyt has been following a ramp up profile which from a distance follows a logarithmic curve since early this year. Closer to the curve the peaks and troughs of daily SP movements will be more noticeable but for valuation purposes the curve should be seen from a distance where it appears as a trend.
Think of it as the curve a car follows under maximum acceleration. The car's acceleration is its fastest at the beginning of the curve and it slows progressively until it reaches its maximum speed or its optimised state.
Conversely it's earnings or profitability expressed in unit terms (per test) will almost certainly follow an exponential curve. It increases rather than slows as it undergoes the effect of “economies of scale”.The more units produced the cheaper the unit costs. Fixed costs which all companies have are progressively diluted as the production increases.
The principle of the "earnings" metric takes the net profit and simply multiplies it by a factor or ratio. (the price/earnings ratio)
The ratio can be best established by benchmarking against a businesses piers or where that is not possible the lifespan or other factors such as risk or debt ratios as may be appropriate.
3 of 4
In establishing the p/e ratio Analysts will consider other all manor of erogenous factors . Things like goodwill, the skills and competence of employees and the company's risks, its structure it’s location for example. The earnings metric works best by taking the fundamentals from when businesses are running in an optimised and steady state.
When businesses are ramping as Novacyt is the cash flow must be discounted in any assessment.. However it should still take the economies of scale into account and follow the trend rather than the daily SP fluctuations.
It is very apparent that whoever has designed Navacyts business model has done an excellent job. As an Outsider I don't know the micro details but from a macro view the fact that they have adopted a modular concept speaks volumes. Under the approach they are able to control production both up and down here in the UK simply by bolting on another module (production partner) or by removing one from the chain.
On 15 April Novacyt announced plans to increase manufacturing capacity to approximately 8m tests per month. Novacyt is on track with this scale-up and expects to achieve at least this level of output during this month.
Novacyt has signed agreements with six sub-contract manufacturers in addition to its own two production sites in Southampton and Camberley. which provides greater contingency and the flexibility to scale-up its manufacturing outputs beyond eight million tests per month when necessary.
But it's more than just about numbers. Novacyt have also adopted a strategic approach. They have covered production across the UK and whilst that obviously cuts logistical costs it is not the main reason. It’s secondary. The main reason is it cuts down the time it takes to get the results. It’s an important factor in the fight against the virus. Test results must be available within 24 hours. It’s crucial.
I believe Novacyt will achieve an optimised and steady state for it’s first phase here in the UK by October this year. There may well be subsequent phases here achieved by bolting on more modules but the details of those are undisclosed.
It’s not difficult to imagine that if the business works well as a unit here Novacyt may well consider “baking another cake” in other countries too. Germany certainly springs to ming and I doubt finance will be an impediment.
Novacyt is such an attractive business and has set standards others in the space can only envy. It’s because of that we as shareholders need to be on our guard against aggressive suitors. We must not allow the business to be taken from us on the cheap. We need to share our opinions and understanding of what the company is worth. In my view it’s currently considerably undervalued.
4 of 4
So what does all this come down to in a relatively short term? Here's my view;-
I have the company producing 10m tests per month at that point and for ease of maths receiving £1bn in annual revenue. If profit or earnings is 50% at the moment I have it about 55% at least by then. I could work it the DCF more accurately but there seems little point at this stage.I believe a reasonable P/E ratio by then to be between 3 & 4 at least.
That would give the company a notional Market Cap £1.65bn & £2.2bn. Derived from that we get to an SP of between £22 and £30 providing the shares in issue stays the same.
Where we are now the earnings figure should be around £300m annualised and the p/e possibly 2. If that's right we get to a SP of between £8.50 providing the shares in issue stays the same.
The argument that the argument knows best is laughable and old fashioned. Even if it did hold merit it can't apply to companies ramping up. Science has the market as being always behind the curve. Hence the volatility we're witnessing in the SP. Investors make the market and they're not sure what to make if Novacyt at the moment.
Fingers crossed!
AIMHO.
1 of 4
If you're reading this with a rigid view that Novacyt will continue losing value from here or that for whatever reason you no longer want to stay invested then please don't bother to read this. It's not intended for you and it's unlikely to be of interest.
I don’t post very often and when I do it's only my own honest opinions I give . Without exception.
There are many ways of valuing Novacyt and views on the one that applies a "p/e multiplier" being exchanged on here recently. I recognise the method as one based on using an earnings metric and it’s one of my favourites.
It's just one of three of the most common ones used by Analysts. The others being one that's asset based and one that's based on benchmarking against similar companies in the space. Those producing COVID -19 Antigen tests that is.
Professional Analysts or rather the better ones will use several methods to value businesses and then take a weighted average. Of course the real value of anything material will be what another party is prepared to pay for it. In other words more of a commercial approach taking expert valuations as references.
A commercial offer from a suitor may be more than or less than an Analysts valuation. As often happens an initial offer may be less but may not be the best one the offeror may make. Almost invariably it’s not.
Some will argue the earnings metric method is inappropriate in Novacyts case. But support for that argument can only come from two principles in my view.
The first principle is the one that says the demand for Novacyts tests will fall off substantially in a relatively short time once the pandemic passes.
The second principle says that Novacyts fundamentals are too unstable to use it whilst it's in its ramping up state.
It pains me very much to say that under the first one demand is unlikely to exceed supply for some considerable time to come. This virus isn't going away anytime soon unfortunately. Before the pandemic is over we're likely to see hot-spots flare up in areas where the "R" value creeps above 1. These areas will call for a high degree of testing approach under local authorities guidance. We're already seeing it in fact.
2 of 4
When and if the pandemic subsides I believe we'll see epidemics springing up around the globe. In our fight against it we are going to need Antigen and Antibody tests along vaccine and drugs. Everyone will have a rightful place in our toolboxes.
When the disease is under control demand will not just come down to how many tests will be needed for testing per sa. It’ll be more to do with “capacity needed” in readiness for Governments and Institutions etc to cope with further outbreaks or even another strain.
Antibody tests have an eighteen month shelf life and the cost in economic terms and human lives through being caught out again in future is unthinkable. So I firmly believe we'll see a stock of both Antigen and Antibody tests being kept in reserve at all times across the world. Supply will struggle to match testing demand let alone provide sufficient to replenish stocks in my view. Do some fag packet numbers and you will be surprised.
On the second principle it’s true to say the SP is volatile and profit isn't constant just yet.
As with any newly producing company there will be a point when it establishes an "optimised and steady state" but for Novacyt we may yet see a series of these and the business could well be developed in phases.
Understanding the development path isn't too difficult . Novacyt has been following a ramp up profile which from a distance follows a logarithmic curve since early this year. Closer to the curve the peaks and troughs of daily SP movements will be more noticeable but for valuation purposes the curve should be seen from a distance where it appears as a trend.
Think of it as the curve a car follows under maximum acceleration. The car's acceleration is its fastest at the beginning of the curve and it slows progressively until it reaches its maximum speed or its optimised state.
Conversely it's earnings or profitability expressed in unit terms (per test) will almost certainly follow an exponential curve. It increases rather than slows as it undergoes the effect of “economies of scale”.The more units produced the cheaper the unit costs. Fixed costs which all companies have are progressively diluted as the production increases.
The principle of the "earnings" metric takes the net profit and simply multiplies it by a factor or ratio. (the price/earnings ratio)
The ratio can be best established by benchmarking against a businesses piers or where that is not possible the lifespan or other factors such as risk or debt ratios as may be appropriate.