AS previously mentioned on here, I was surprised, no flabbergasted, with the recent fund raise.
Why did it fund raise at this time. ? Clearly, it did not expect an early approval of EIA otherwise it would have waited to get an humungous amount of cash flowing in. We had been told company had sufficient cash at hand to see it through 'til end of year. So probably, as a poster mentioned, the auditors would not sign off the A/cs as a 'going concern' for a further 12 months. The audited A/cs are issued sometime in April for YE '23, so time was of the essence. The PDMR's could have had a private loan to the company to see it through to EIA approval. If EIA was not to be approved, then no amount of cash would save the Moroccan operation. So, on the surface, it appears that it was a 'genuine' raise to further promote KMA and EIA approval, rather than my initial 'usual' thought of 'raise to continue to pay salaries. expenses and pension pot payments.'. Clearly, my initial thought and hope was that EIA would be resolved before end April. With the foregoing, this is extremely unlikely to happen. However, a further 8 weeks should be ufficient time to promote thefeasibility of the KMA process, and allay fears that concern Committee. So, by end of June it is then. sp will probably 'wobble' around current level during this time frame, unless RNS drops with either 'good or bad' news on developments. RNS drop,!!!, we should be so lucky.
Of course this 'chart' will be nonsensical when the rns drops for EISA approval or disapproval.
What we need swazers to do is to draw a chart showing when rns's will drop. Shouldn't be too hard with his imagination. ?
Thnx Plantdad the info from Rice Uni of the Thermal Process.
This is the temperature, 2830dC, ( plasma forming). that was mentioned very early on in PHE RNS's to get a Plasma which separated the various plastic/tyre feed stocks into molecular components. The problem is not attaining these very high temperatures, but containing it in a thermally efficient refractory box. IOW a kiln. Has anyone up to date figures from PHE on kiln temperatures.?
This might have been a stumbling block that caused Peel angst and their decision to opt out.!
Si and Al based refractories are of no use at this temperature, to my knowledge, and only Graphite refractories can withstand these kind of temperatures. Very expensive. Graphite sublimates rater than melts.
Ship leaving China 29 April. Hope it is routed via S Africa. Knowing the luck of this outfit, if vessel enters Red Sea, struck by drone, sinks, and then wait long time for insurance claim. Take away all possible Black Swan events. Simple.
The article does not explain this 'new' process, and only hints that as well as H2 being produced, Graphene is also produced. That makes me think very high temperatures are involved, but the photo accompanying the article shows a guy in a lab coat, messing around with 'unknown' products in a Petri dish.!! Look like a room temperature 'chemical breakdown' process. !!
Not excited by this.
Really pi**ed off. Bought in too soon. Never thought there would be a fund raise before EISA. Poster who thought A/cs would not be 'signed off' because of lack of cash, got it spot on. Has also now given much more time for Company to dilly dally inputting forward new proposal including KMA. And it will dilly dally. 'A few weeks time' lol. Another imminent and another 'rod for his back'. I can't add shares to reduce average in Rex offer since I am not a UK resident. And Gremlins are now saying 'don't throw good money after bad.'
Hopefully, new Investors will use 1;1 Warrant Issue, meaning SP above 3p, so EISA awarded, tarnished by massive dilution again, which **cks up all previous posted material on 'payback times', final sp etc. What's to like.
Thank Heavens I bought RR. at 77p. Will stick to watch that rise and forget EML for a few months.
It is my experience that companies who have had a large consolidation (50:1) drift lower until a positive RNS is released. There will be some SH's who sell because they do not know there has been a consolidation, and are perplexed when their no of shares in account is only a fraction of what they believe it to be. !!!
The company fundamentals above has not recalculated no of shares in issue. The 'old' no is c1b, the new no should be about 22M. The MC, I believe is correct.
AJ27
Never in the field of company endeavour have so many companies failed to meet forecast capital payback time frames.
And I do not expect EML to buck this trend. Then, as I alluded to, after debt paid of, there is capital reqiured for business expansion, MnA, new plant, machinery, etc, etc, The list goes on and on. Something else where companies prefer to use surplus cash is Share Buyback programmes. It benefits SH's in reducing no of shares in issue, so is an obvious benefit when divis are eventually paid, and equally as important, taxation benefits. 20 years may have been conservative, but definitely no divis within 10 years. Hope we are both around at that time to continue the debate.
Wheresallthemoney.
Divis will only be paid to SH's when the mine is up and running, profitable and has cleared majority of debt, and has all the necessary assets to mine for 20,30 years. t may also want to venture into the acquisitions market. The timescale for divis is therefore at least 15/20 years away. If, as I suggested, the sp attains a MC in line with the profitability statements issued by the Company, then it will be around the £2.30ps mark. I would expect a yearly divi of 15p ps. Anyone buying in now, and holding for 15/20 years would then have to take into account the actual values of 2p and £2.30 after inflation and taxation. IOW, it is not as good as the figures suggest at first glance.
I believe there are only 2 'near term' outcomes, first, no EISA award and the company files for bankruptcy because of lack of cash. No reason for OCP or any other party to act as White Knight, since a 'Firesale' will be a more cost effective solution.
second option is award of EISA, and an immediate rerate of sp to ?. I have posted a year or so ago, when sp was a higher, that EISA would give a 15p sp , based on the '2 year run up' to production and a probable£2.30 sp based on projected revenues. Since nothing will have changed, except for the positive elements provided by KMA and some 'better' more expensive saleable products, then 15 p is still a 'target' sp, albeit more likely attainable after a month or so after EISA award. I reason this since there will have to be the inevitable fund raise following award of EISA, and this will diminish the fervour to buy immediately after award. I 'guess' that 7p is a more realistic target immediately following award.
at 2p, with '2 month target' of 15p following award, there is a 13p upside and only a 2p downside. It is irrelevant if you buying at 2p now or have bought higher). My thought is that it is more 'likely than not' to be awarded following return of decision to local and the new KMA process. I therefore believe it is better than a 50:50 chance of approval, and a 750% gain. A no brainer. Other investors will have a different probability of EISA approval, and can do their own maths. A decision not to 'buy' can only be made if their probability is 7.5 /1 against award.
Naturally, by my reasoning I should be 'going all in'. I already have 'bought back in', and will 'invest' a further £1k, and my final 'investment' will be what I am prepared to lose, which should be the 'mantra' for all investment decisions; Only invest what you can afford, and are prepared to lose.
RightInvestor'lol
Yr post;
RE: Another string to the bow.11 Mar 2024 08:05
This share will fly in the next 2 weeks
Today is 25 March, so 2 weeks has passed. Not flying, but grounded. And for good measure, and to cover yourself, you posted 'will fly in next 2 weeks', 3 days ago. please cut out your nonsense posts, you just make yourself look very foolish and somewhat of an id*t.
Woolverstone. Your comment that he EISA was 'too important' for the 'local' Committee to approve is incorrect.
The 6 July RNS which informed us of a decision, clearly stated;
'Following a recent evaluation meeting, the Commission Régionale Unifiée d'Investissement ("CRUI"), the regional investment authority, was unable to approve the application, '
The RNS gave no reasons, but in a preamble the Company stated it was the 'usual culprits'. Water usage, brine run offs.
In light of the fact that this BOD are rather 'Scrooge like' with divesting information to the owners of the Company, us, as S/H's'. I conjectured at the time that I thought the refusal was because if it granted EISA and water then became a serious issue, the 'locals' were making a 'rod for it's own back'. So, it passed the buck. National has now countered this by returning 'the buck', thus giving them full control on the decision. For reasons previously explained, I fully expect EISA to be awarded, sooner, rather than later.
Mat. Look through your posts, stoopida is all over you. And still can't answer the question. Why?, because you made it all up in your little brain. End of Year before decision on EISA. Now that is stoopida Mat. Thinking is not your game is it?
Synxs.
I assume that comment, 'you move from h2 isnt the future to I'm a H2 consultant', is completely wrong. I have always thought that H2 Fuel Cells were the future for transportation, BUT NOT FOR CARS. At the moment HFC costs are too expensive for the mass car market, The models that are available in Eu are over Eu70K, which is not for the mass car markrt, BYD in China is mfing 'cheaper' HFC cars, that are barely 'family sized'. For the foreseeable future, The transition away from carcinogenic fossil fuels to H2 will probably happen with more efficient, cost effective Solid State Battery cars. Heavier transport solutions should be HFC based.
This is not 'new' storage technique for H2.
This process is 'metal anhydrides'. Google it. The structure of the metal anhydride allows it to adsorb H2 molecules onto its surface. This process requires some form of energy, normally pressure. When you want to 'release' the H2, again energy is needed, this can be electrical or heat. in the early days of research, the base metal was normally iron, Fe. The more energy needed to effect adsorption, then a similar amount of energy is needed to release the H2. This has been a stumbling block in the past. I did post several years ago that I envisaged going into a service station, and replacing my 'used' bag of ,say, 5kg H2 metal anhydride pack, with a fully charged one. and obviously, more safe in transport than either pressurised or liquified H2. Boron has also been used as the metal base in the past, however, obtaining high grade Boron powder is expensive ( or at least was). Now we wait to see how many years it takes to commercialise.
Mat
'Just say youve bought back in and you'd like us all to take it higher please.
It's more honest.'
You are still a very bitter chappie. Now, this is the way to shut you up, Tell me what is 'dishonest' in my post. Goodbye, again.