Member Info for TO73

Yah, no. I will stop moaning if/when I get 3.5 times my investment. Opportunity cost.

Robdog67,

I am up!

I am in positive territory for the very first time :)

Wake me up when you get to 18p.

I cannot help how you process information.

Take care now ;)

I do apologise, I do not spend all of my time waiting with bated breath as to the next new thing about Thor. I may do better if I have more time freed up. :)

A successful auditor appointment helps but certainly does not resolve the matter. I certainly never put that down as one of my parameters. It did not even cross my mind.

Even if you are not privy to the accountancy industry, the situation is reflected in the current share price. Any improvements in the share price after the auditor appointment? If not, that should serve as evidence to support my points. All auditors absolve themselves of the ability to detect fraud. If they did, they would report it. It is, however, not their duty to detect fraud.

You may not follow accountancy news, but I do. BDO has been slated by regulators as to the quality of their audits. This was made very public in the last two weeks. One article even suggested they could be struck off. For some people, the appointment of better-rated auditors would have done more for the company's image. For me, not so much. I know the industry.

So, we keep lounging at 13.79p. Management can keep doing what it's doing or make a change. It is their choice.

Till next time. It has been,

The concern churner :)

The crux of the matter is to understand why Thor's share price is currently undervalued. The company suggests it's because junior gold miners are generally overlooked by the market. However, I've demonstrated that this isn't always the case, particularly with the recent increase in gold prices, which has positively impacted the share prices of similar companies. This implies there could be other reasons investors are hesitant about Thor.

You've shifted your argument, now implying I'm referring to events from four or five years ago. That's inaccurate. Thor listed on the LSE AIM in 2021. They were obligated to file audited statements in 2022 for the year ending 2021, and in 2023 for the year ending 2022. They failed to do so, which is a clear breach of LSE rules. This isn't ancient history; it happened last year and the year before. Combine that with actual profits being less than half of what was projected, even though gold prices are significantly higher than projections, and guidance not being fully and consistently met, and you have a recipe for investor doubt.

I've also noticed inconsistencies between Thor's filings on SEDAR and the LSE RNS. The official notice of BDO's resignation and BDO's confirmation letter are on SEDAR, but I couldn't find them on RNS. Moreover, Thor's notice (4 numbered paragraphs) doesn't state the reason for BDO's resignation. Note that I am talking about the official notice and not the announcement. This leaves Thor's explanation unverified. It might be insignificant, or it might not. It is worth exploring considering significant misstatements of inventory and liabilities in the years 2021 and 2022 were highlighted by the auditor. Note that shareholders only got to know about them just a few months ago. The only way to know the reason for BDO's resignation for sure is to seek confirmation from independent third parties.

The unfiled audited accounts are just one of my many concerns. I've raised at least 12 issues, which you've read. You even agreed that I have a right to ask these questions and expressed interest in the answers. What's changed? Even if I weren't a shareholder, I'd still have the right to inquire. If I had concerns, I'd want them addressed before investing my money. Don't you see how addressing these concerns could positively impact the share price?

The situation can still be turned around with convincing answers. If there are no good answers, then silence might be the best approach. That would explain the current 13.72p share price. Perhaps attracting some uninformed investors could boost the share price, but I wasn't raised to profit from people's lack of knowledge. The approach I see is to lure people in with the promise of higher cash flows. Cash flows were decent in 2022 and 2023. What was the bottom line in those years though?

RE: Audited financial statements

Before any of you feign ignorance about the years in question, the years in question are 2021 and 2022.

I have already made a post about my findings on SEDAR. For absolute clarity and I have repeated this too many times already - the authority in question is the London Stock Exchange. This is where I bought my shares from. And I am only talking about it because you brought it up again. My guess is to divert attention from how spiralling costs have eroded promised profits.

1) The CEO can do as he pleases. If he’s too inexperienced to realise that one vocal opinion represents many, he shouldn’t be in a job. A member of the public sees no evidence of filing at the LSE, and the professional response is to stay quiet? Let’s hope you’re just a random investor and not him. For the company’s sake, I sincerely hope not. If he is sensible, he will ask that every single concern expressed about the company anywhere he can see anywhere on the Internet is collated and he will address each and every single one if them in a special Q&A or anyhow else he sees fit. If he is unwise, he will listen to you lot(assuming you are not all just some members if staff who hurry to like any of their boss' posts and comments 😉. If behemoth organisations can take time to respond, but a small company that takes money from members if the public cannot, it’s no wonder Thor’s share price is in the doldrums.

2) Show me the evidence that Thor Explorations filed audited accounts with the London Stock Exchange. Prove me wrong. If you can’t, it’s wise to stay quiet. :) I am ahead of you here. You will tell me to do my own research . You have no time to collect data. You only have time to throw insults 😂🤣.

3) If you haven’t seen anyone consistently take time out to address people’s concerns in good faith, you probably don’t get out much, I’m afraid.

4) Who are these message boards for? You? 😂🤣.

5) As usual, not a single ounce of substance from you. Not an iota. A complete waste of time as usual.

Adw, you seem to think I don't appreciate feedback. The evidence suggests otherwise. When any of you posts data, I diligently cross-check it and share my findings. But when I present the truth, it's met with personal attacks. Are insults the kind of "feedback" I'm supposed to enjoy? That's a rather twisted definition of constructive criticism, wouldn't you say?

Remember that time, Kat-079, when I pointed out management's reliability—or lack thereof—and how those FCF promises in the 2021 CPR report were about as trustworthy as a chocolate teapot? They projected $64.5 million through 2023, even with modest gold prices and capex spread over four years instead of the entire LOM. Yet, we’re left with a paltry $30.353 million in retained earnings—and that’s only after the auditor stepped in! All this while gold prices were soaring well above expectations!

Your reason for the cost blowout? Inflation! The classic scapegoat. But then, how did they manage to slash operating expenses the following year, only for capital expenditure to increase by an amount significantly more than the opex savings? That part’s still a mystery, isn’t it?

I don’t see how any average investor wouldn’t recognise that, along with the other major issues I’ve highlighted, as a red flag—or at least consider them likely reasons why investors or potential investors might be spooked.

Kat-079, you told me to "do my own research." Well, consider it done, homework handed in, and ready for grading! I presented my findings, laid out the evidence, even offered some friendly advice to management. And what did I get in return? A detour into personal attacks instead of addressing the facts.

It's like I baked you a cake, and instead of tasting it, you critiqued my apron. It's a bit hard to take someone seriously when they'd rather sling mud than engage in a meaningful conversation.

So, no hard feelings, but until we can focus on the data and leave the personal jabs at the door, I'm afraid my "seriousness meter" for this discussion is running a bit low.

Alright, Kat-079, let's play a little game of "Spot the Misrepresentation."

You said, "I don't think anyone is trying to prove that there are other gold miners out there as unloved as THX. Just that there are other examples that are still fundamentally undervalued compared to the wider market."

Fair enough, undervalued gems are sprinkled throughout the market, not just in the gold mines. Vodafone, Alibaba, even Lloyds and Docusign have had their moments in the bargain bin.

But here's where the game gets interesting. This board has been buzzing with the lament of the "unloved junior gold miner," Thor being the poster child. Yet, I've used examples from this very board to show how these "unloved" miners have actually seen some pretty impressive share price growth compared to last year. And you call that a misrepresentation?

So, Kat-079, I'm handing you the magnifying glass. Show us where the misrepresentation lies. Is it in the numbers? The comparisons? Or perhaps, in the narrative we've all been subscribing to?

The floor is yours. Let's see if you can crack this case.

Kat079, so what's the real story? That those other companies are just as unloved as Thor Explorations? Keep in mind, I didn't choose those companies—one of you did. I simply verified the information.

What would be helpful is if you could use verifiable data to present the true state of those companies, if you're able. Please demonstrate with verifiable facts that they are just as unloved as Thor Explorations.

Kat079, you cannot pinpoint the reason Thor is so undervalued and yet you keep attacking the person presenting evidence-based opinions? Does that make any sense to you? The natural approach of a true investor who truly care cares about their investment would be to seek the veracity of any such evidence. When "harchris" made a statement about SRB, as a true investor, I checked , only to find out it was just more misinformation. Do you not understand how desperate I am to obtain verifiable evidence to explain the situation? Not a single one of you is helping. None. The times I have obtained information partly addressing one of two concerns, I have posted it here.

Adw, why are you so bothered by what I do? Have I ever asked you if you’re buying, holding, or selling? Not once! Remember, this board is like a buffet of opinions – you get eight different flavours, and everyone can pick their favourite. What I do, did, or will do shouldn’t matter to any of you. Why can’t you see that?

This board is for discussing issues, not for playing whack-a-mole with people. What some of you (and I suspect it’s just one or two of you with a bunch of fake moustaches) do is attack me when you can’t handle the real issues.

Compare our approaches: when you present something as a fact, I show why it’s as believable as a unicorn because there’s either no evidence or the evidence available contradicts it. When the truth beats you, you resort to name-calling.

Kat079, In one of your recent posts, you called facts that anyone can check on Yahoo or Google Finance “lies.” Do you really think people are that clueless and can’t verify information themselves?

Again, what I do shouldn’t be your concern. Though, I admit, during the peak of the shenanigans on this board, I asked one of my brokers for quotes twice, and they couldn’t give me one. They just couldn't. Illiquidity, folks! I have set my parameters. And I am under no obligation to tell you what I do or when I do. Anyone with zero shares is able to post here. So why don't you just focus on the issues?

Isn't it impressive how Kat-079 quickly pinpointed the reasons for PAF's share price decline this time last year? Why is it such a challenge to identify the factors affecting Thor's 🤔?

Kat-079

Ah, so you're saying that even a golden goose can get the flu, and the market might not be too sympathetic? Colour me shocked! Who'd have thought that digging up shiny rocks could be a tad unpredictable?

But in all seriousness, you're absolutely right. The world of finance is rarely as simple as it seems on a balance sheet. It's a bit like that old saying: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Even the most solid-looking numbers can hide a multitude of operational gremlins lurking in the mineshafts.

So, let's raise a glass to the unpredictable nature of gold mining, and the ever-present possibility of a surprise twist in the tale of even the most promising companies. And remember, when it comes to investing, a healthy dose of skepticism is always a good companion to those shiny balance sheets 😉.

Everyone agrees that Thor is undervalued. The real issue is understanding why this is happening and what the company needs to do to fix it, especially since the share prices of its peers are performing well.

It should be obvious by now that higher gold prices has made no difference and paying down the senior debt has not improved the situation.

You are yet to demonstrate how other gold miners are as unloved as Thor.

Re: neurodivergent

Everyone has their own strengths and challenges. Being labeled ‘neurodiverse’ simply means that we all think and process information differently. I appreciate your perspective and hope we can understand each other better .

It costs nothing to be nice :)

Adw, did you read my post(s) at all? How do you conclude I am now using MCAP for comparisons???????? How???

Troajan,

I need you to please do comparisons. Demonstrate how they are unloved by the market compared to Thor

More on MCAP and its value in comparisons when discussing a company's attractiveness to investors. Let me give a popular example - Alibaba.

Market capitalisation is a key metric when comparing a company's attractiveness to investors, but it doesn't always tell the full story. Take Alibaba as a popular example. The company embarked on a significant share buyback programme, but despite reducing the number of shares outstanding, there was no corresponding significant increase in the share price. Consequently, the market capitalisation decreased. This scenario demonstrates that market capitalisation might not always reflect a company's intrinsic value, particularly when external factors like regulatory concerns, operational efficiency, or broader market sentiment weigh heavily on the stock.

In some cases (as in the examples I’ve cited), share price performance can offer a more immediate reflection of investor sentiment, making it a useful metric for comparison. This is why I used share price.

Wesdome: £6.70 on 10 August 2023 to £13.04 today.

MTL: 1.8p this time last year to 4.59p today.

CMCL: Approximately 835p (remains about the same).

PAF: 13.28p this time last year to 28.2p today.

BUT

Thor: 20.50p this time last year to 13.72p today.

Please keep the examples coming, Trojan.