Member Info for Wigwammer

The company believes the flotation process can move gold recovery from 71% to 90% from the agitation plant. Gold produced from agitation was 11222oz in q1 at 71%, so 90% would add around 3000oz to quarterly production. Presumably, this would be achieved at little incremental cost, meaning the circa $3.5m addition to quarterly top line would flow straight through to profit - that's $14m pa. Adding on the $6.5m devaluation savings, we could see a $20m step change in profitability over the next 12-24 months, assuming a stable pog. With a $10m market cap, risk reward looks good, imv.

"Clearly everything coincided nicely and they sold everything in stock. They now really need to demonstrate they can continue to build production whilst reducing debt" Last interims showed a $20m net current account surplus. 2000oz would equate to a pretty small fraction of that - circa $2.5m. So potentially everything in stock, but by no means everything liquid. The nca is pretty substantial - 40% of the net debt, but I don't know the cost of finally converting it into bullion.

"achl sits on a substantial cash and asset pile, and it's mc is a fraction of both" That IS exact information from the company itself. Or perhaps you don't look at the accounts.

Up she goes. Bigoranger - the poster who has been pushing the stock off the lows is currently sitting on healthy profits. In short, achl sits on a substantial cash and asset pile, and it's mc is a fraction of both. We await any information (any information at all) from bigoranger.

Consensus shorts getting squeezed. If we get through resistance around 9p the lid is off.

Posts = 2. Hmmmm... I wonder...

Posts = 1. Can't be too much doubt about your true motivation.

Your qns were answered. Perhaps the qns weren't very good. Btw "Purchases from the Group’s five largest suppliers accounted for approximately 37.5% of the Group’s total purchases for the year and purchases from the Group’s largest supplier amounted to approximately 11.8%." AR 2013/14.... Fact: largest supplier constitutes just 11.8% of costs. Difficult to see the winners in this obvious/definite/unquestionable/consensual fraud.

I have been buying

Your posts carry a lot of words, all of which miss the point: $6.5m annualised is: 1) circa $100 off the aisc pa 2) sufficient to fund the entire debt pa 3) equal to a circa £40m increase in the enterprise value of the stock, assuming the $6.5m is discounted at 10%, or about 8x the market cap prior to the announcement If you spent more time thinking intelligently, and less time posting wordy smuggy messages, you might have made money here. Atb, ww

Thanks for your thoughtful post. 2012 was a year of strong growth, 2013 showed decent levels of profitability - not that long ago. 2014 - obviously a disaster. From here, sales should have based. Looking forward, 2nd half 2015 into 2016 - 3 things happen 1) recovery from the two legacy plantations 2) hunan begins to produce 3) utilisation from the new juice assets should improve. Over a 3-5 year period the legacy assets should recover to previous productivity, the top line will be diversified across 3 plantations and a broader range of fruits, and the juice contribution should rise in the mix ie we get a bigger, more diversified business. Key point is - the growth should start to show into 2016. When does the market price this in? Hard to say - but the market has not reacted badly to what is at face value a terrible report today. Plus - this stock hasn't simply seen a derating over the last year, but potentially a capitulation, valued at half nca. Risks for me aren't so much the operating factors, or even the corporate governance fears, but the point that 90% of their cash is kept in Chinese banks, about which I know very little. But on balance, I think this is a well funded growth/recovery story from here, on a very low multiple of recovered earnings.

With due respect, the net working capital covered around 70% of the market cap. Valuation matters. Doesn't sound like suicide to me, or feel like it.

The ordinary div paid in 2012 was 1.81p, or a circa 24% div yield at the current share price of 7.5p. If the market gets a sense that operating conditions are normalising, with the capacity to resume dividends at a similar level, then clearly the price is unlikely to stay where it is. Why should conditions normalise? Because 40 year typhoons tend not to repeat every year. There is chance that operating conditions can take a step above the previous peak given time 1) the third plantation is due to go into production in 2016, after many years of sunk investment 2) while unpleasant, a business that survives dire conditions can learn a lot in the process eg how to manage crop and storm damage, how to protect assets, how to diversify effectively. The cash position suggests they will survive.

I have answered your questions. "Trend" - the main operating driver of the price fall has been bad weather. Unless you anticipate a once in forty year weather pattern repeating every year then that isn't a trend. "Plenty of cash" - the cash was received through a placing with, among others, fidelity, wellington and temasek. Not exactly an obvious Pandora's box. "Comps" - in key aspects, such as longevity and div policy, they are poor comparisons. They do all have China somewhere in the description though. I can answer your question about chaoda, but with due respect, I have answered your other points. Chaoda originally held just under 50% from memory - now 5% - I suspect there is a list of reasons they are selling: 1) Chaoda is a highly distressed co and they may need the cash, or have been forced to raise the cash 2) the original fertiliser agreements were terminated in 2012 on achl's request - there is no longer an operating link between the co's 3) some guy in their finance dept may believe that a once in forty year event represents a trend. Btw I'm happy to let readers make their own minds up as to whether the facts I'm presenting are relevant and credible.

I'm not too interested in comps and trends, which is why I don't do a great deal of posting/reading on lse. I do something more revolutionary - I open the annual report and read. The current "trend" can in large part be explained by typhoon damage. I suspect they didn't manufacture the typhoon. Nor do I expect the most damaging typhoon to hit south china in 40 years to be repeated every year. In the meantime, the assets recover. The cash position is high because of a placing undertaken in 2010/11, in part to purchase a beverage division, partly to fund capital expansion at the beverage division, and partly to purchase a plantation where an mou had been agreed but was not completed. The placees included fidelity, wellington and the government of singapore. You know, highly suspect counter parties. They have since completed share repurchases and special divs, although now the cash is coming in useful post the storm damage. You tend not to find this sort of info by gazing at a chart, or reading the latest consensus drivel. As stated, I haven't owned these shares. My track record is excellent. I have no need to demonstrate it to you. Just to point out, in a manner you haven't been capable of refuting, that comparing a long listed co with a history of divs, special divs, and share repurchases to a a p1le of ****e is not particularly useful.

4 of your 5 examples don't have a trading history. 4 of your 5 examples have no history of paying a div. Yet you think they are comparable to a company that has both. No I haven't been invested in this stock. "The trend"... Lol.. Verr sophisticated.

How many of those have a listed history of more than a couple of years? One. How many have a history of paying dividends and special dividends? None. ACHL has a 10 year+ history as a listed co, and has paid divs and special divs in 8 out of the last 10 years. The "sell everything China" cliche is, with respect, a poor excuse for lazy research. I suspect the cliche is creating opportunities.

Kissing the sky! http://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/researchreports/skyepharma040713outlook.pdf Note not only the target of nearly £2, but also the operating cash flow in 2017 of £48m pa. When the debt is nearly fully paid off in 2017, shareholders will wholly own £48m pa of non cyclical, low capex requirement cash flows. Value this at 10x and you get a market cap of £480m in 2017, versus £29m now . I suspect we won't be waiting until 2017 for this to rerate however.

The farm out deal IS the story??! Unless we get this quick as bondholder points out, we may as well have stuck with weiss and taken the cash.

Yes dobboy, resulting in a 56% rise the shares over 1 year. Terrible terrible!! We still need to make sure we hold management to the plan laid out in the prelims however, including minimal cash burn, a credible farm out plan, and in the absence of a credible farm out then the return of cash to shareholders.