Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Blahblah what is the point of your post ? We know that the sp normally makes a swift recovery from the instability and distortion referred to in the title of this thread which you refuse to acknowledge . How do you know that the sp could not be even higher but for the 10% overnight off the market mugging. ?
I have repeatedly asked you to comment on paragraph 7 of notes in the bookbuild RNS . You wont because that might require the use of terms such as " conflict of interest " or" lack of disclosure" and that would be too much of a challenge for you
ATB
Not helping that JLP are trading on AIM , in the near to medium a nice increasing revenue stream along with the well diversified board as per the recent announcements will assist in a move to the main market.
BlahBlah care to comment on para 7 and the the question posed in the title of this thread ?
BlahBlah I note that you still have not commented on the possible connotations of para 7 and the fact that if the book builders can trade to their own account gives them no incentive to obtain a price close to the market price .
I also note that you do not comment on the question asked in the title of this thread I find that very illuminating .
For once and for all lets put to bed your obsession with the word con . I have previously stated that markets have to be seen to be free fair and transparent otherwise they simply cannot function . The con element here is the fact that shareholders ( the market ) have to meekly take a mugging via a process which is demonstrably not free and fair . A confidence trick that they can perpetrate with immunity .
ATB
BlahBlah you concoct a fraud allegation then accuse me of dishonesty ! Squirm into a spasm over the many definitions of the word con . There is no ambiguity in "overnight mugging " but you cannot address that because it would cause you to answer the question posed in the title of the thread and the equity of the BB process. If you overcome your reluctance look at para 7 ( post 3rd June ) which states that the book builder is allowed to participate in the BB on their own account then ask yourself how investment bankers make such luxurious annual profits . Good luck to them. Just one of many possible chances for the privileged participants in the BB process to make a profit. You need to understand the difference between conjecture and accusation . Only the former is possible with the lack of disclosure in the BB process and no accusations of " fraud " have been made. I would hazard a guess though that if complete disclosure was made, the content would be within the rules but it would raise quite a few eyebrows.
BlahBlah the fraud insinuation was yours . Perhaps you have not heard of the phrase " pros & cons ". Advantages & disadvantages . Well fraud here would be a very major disadvantage and it is not catered for in the word con. You do not comment on the main theme of my post that of equity , so presumably you consider it acceptable that individuals have pricing power over on the market trades .
with the market not individuals away from it . BlahBlah in various posts I have made clear my concerns about the bookbuild process. Seems that you cannot grasp the reality here , so I will have yet another attempt .
The term fraud was proposed by you not by me . Institutional parties agree OFF the market to a share price acceptable to them all .Even with the apparent complete lack of scrutiny and disclosure it is obvious that within the process there is no scope for criminal deception fraud . The bookbuild is announced after hours and the price agreed by this cosy arrangement is imposed ON the market the next day with immediate impact on all shareholders and possible financial loss for some . I believe that the market price should be set by trades ON the market and that price fix should take should take precedence. The con is the fact that regulators allow institutions to perform what is in effect an overnight mugging .Not rocket science ,a simple concept to grasp . It is called equity.
ATB
Thanks for info Barny . Lets hope the operators stick together ,
IMO nothing to worry about , this will probably be a bit volatile as a result of the uncertainty caused by after hours bookbuilds and become vulnerable to rumour mongering . A solid long term hold ,even a trader given this volatility . I will be adding tomorrow if this weakness holds.
BlahBlah The mention of fraud is yours not mine yet another distortion and lie. I have made it clear that IMO all the rules were complied with . The parties involved in the bookbuild (there could be quite a lot of them we will never know with the lack of disclosure ) reached an agreement off the market on a price which they were all happy with . Not so jolly though for all shareholders when that OFF market price is applied ON the market . Punters who bought at or near at or near the date of the after hours RNS especially ,could lose out with a 10% immediate loss or tripped stop losses . I consider that profoundly unfair . The rules have been followed otherwise it could not happen but It amounts to a legalizes mugging
Yet again you have not replied to the message in my post and the part that you have attempted to address you choose to distort . The "whatever you fancy " quote was a reference to the fact that you ignored the main theme of my post and instead invented on my behalf various theories around the word con. The" whatever you fancy" referenced you not bookbuilding . You have ignored my post @ 15:32 probably because it is an inconvenience and and continued with your distortions.. I note that you have begrudgingly conceded that more transparency might be due , if you read para 7 you would change your mind . I have often used the word recipient rather than buyer because there may be an element of enrichment in the bookbuild process . The sp was recently approaching new highs then fell back possibly because Pi's were hesitant to buy it up for fear of another institutional mugging this situation is doing AAF no favors .
BlahBlah Just in case I have not made myself clear.
The "con " is the system that allows this form of legalized mugging take place . It is quaint only in name certainly not in practice .
ATB
Hi Blah Blah you seem to be reading my posts and making of them whatever you fancy while ignoring the salient points such as fairness transparency and timing . I have not accused any of the institutions or bankers of illegal actions I merely pointed out that if the news of a guaranteed near term drop in the sp was available to privileged individuals human nature would mean that some might be tempted to act on that knowledge it would be naive to think otherwise. I am confidant that the sellers and bankers did not and would not do anything illegal . To me the PROPOSED bookbuild was done at breakneck speed within 12 hours, presumably bids were solicitated and collated . Note that this was not an accelerated bookbuild where 12 hours might be just feasible . Please read para 7 of the important notices starting with "in connection " it blows my mind .I will not comment on it or else you will say I am open to court proceedings . If the "rules " such as they are allows off market actions to impose a price fix on the market the rules are open to abuse and they need to be changed because they are utterly unfair. Why are the recipients not disclosed this would this would rule out any shady dealings. I think it is unfortunate that the volatility caused by these actions will put off some investors in a great company , although I have benefited by buying the dips I believe this should not be necessary and a more efficient means should be formulated for recipients of the IPO to divest.
Hi BlahBlah thanks for your reply , dishonest and unwise seem a bit strong .
Perhaps you have not read my post on the 30th where I state " stock markets have to be seen to be free fair and transparent otherwise they cannot function " . You state that the details are made public in fact they are not , we know the seller but we do not know the recipient. I wonder why ? Could they be associated companies so the apparent 10% loss for the seller would have no impact we will never know .
OFF the market institutions can get together and formulate a price to impose ON the market. 1.5% of the free float changed hands for a 10% drop in the sp on opening triggering stop losses. Is that free and fair? It amounts to manipulation . RNS after close on 24th - book build - RNS 25th done and dusted . Rollocks
The RNS on the 24th is IMO disingenuous they effectively state that the book build dates are flexible . The word "build "would imply a gradual process . When that RNS was issued they must have known the recipients of the shares ,it is possible that privileged inside information was circulating amongst some individuals that the SP would be mugged by 10% imminently , I am sure that you would know what could be done with that info by an unscrupulous person. As now there was then some large movement in the sp just prior to the 24th. In the absence of an RNS from the company it would be unusual for the sp to fall by 6% at one stage yesterday. I recognize that if those shares were dumped on the it would probably have triggered a larger fall , but at least we could have all participated that's what stock markets are for.
ATB
Interesting gyrations here , could this be the shenanigans before institutions in the know get together and arbitrarily knock 10% off the market cap to suit their own devices ? Some posters here seem to think that the quaintly named "secondary share placing " is normal and acceptable I believe it is just a con .
If a placing is announced I would take it as a great chance to add.
Old Guy ,from an older guy I reckon you are correct, the market gets carried away with itself in both directions but it seems to me that with a yield of over 10% and a strong business that any forward negative news is already well and truly catered for in the sp
About the worse thing that could happen would be a steep rise in interest rates - imo very unlikely because the BOE over the last two decades have shown themselves to be only capable of raising rates from next to nothing to next to nothing .
ATB
£ weakness is a positive here and I see it gaining momentum downwards . Recently added more SERE, in no hurry to take profit the div will get stronger in £ terms could get to 7.5%
I find the terminology JLP uses to describe their sites in Zambia a bit confusing . In the 1976 I was working for RCM at the Luanshya copper mine in northern Zambia not far from the then Zaire copper / cobalt rich region . Luanshya mine was always named as " Roan " and it was near to where the roan antelope was shot. Now they seem to be refering to Roan as being somewhere else
Luanshya mine was loss making but it was kept afloat by an associated shaft called Baluba which had ore incredibly rich in cobalt . The floatation methods were not very efficient so I would think that the dumps around Luanshya ( Roan as it was then ) would be very worthwhile processing for cobalt .
Yes indeed , as usual the key here is the mighty US$
Lets take an extreme ( but not impossible the way things are shaping up ) example . Suppose the African currencies stay stable against the $ while the £ declines by 50% . The profits reported by AAF will remain stable in $ terms , but all of a sudden those $ earnings will be worth a heck of lot more £'s.
Anyway not too serious. I am pretty sure that this company can at least keep up the present rate of earnings growth and even if the next reported earnings are only similar, at this sp it is seriously under valued.
ATB
Hi Highveld , not sure that you are correct. African currencies have done relatively well against the $ when compared with the performance of the "great" British £ . The gBP has fallen against the $ considerably of late and here aaf is quoted in gBP so the $ strength has helped the sp . After all when the £ weakens the FTSE 100 tends to rise because so many of the companies have $ earnings
The gBP is very likely to fall a lot further against the $ because a large % of the population cannot pay their bills as a result of the cost of living crisis . I am sure that the Government here is arrogant and hypocritical ( they cannot even obey their own laws ) enough to default on an international agreement with regards to the Northern Ireland protocol . When that happens a trade war with the EU will ensue and the £ will plummet further thereby strengthening the AAF sp.
ATB