Ben Richardson, CEO at SulNOx, confident they can cost-effectively decarbonise commercial shipping. Watch the video here.
i dont think there is a issue if we were selling to pranagraf persae as i think pranagraf's role is to take graph and turn it into products aimed towards specialised markets i.e., flame ******unt products, so them making a mark up is expected.
the problem would be if we were selling to them at a large discount to market basket prices (tbh i'd expect a small discount as connected so makes sense).
is it disapointing we didnt swallow up pranagraf as originally intended, totally, but its not the end of the world or imo the biggest item of importance right now.
production ramp up to match capacity and then capacity ramp up towards that 84k tpa madagascar target is number 1 aim imo.
I think the problem HarChris is that there are those who preached patience when the SP was multiples of now.
As a company, as a miner, stuff takes years. Mining isnt a get rich quick industry, but as an investor, buy price vs your sell price is surely all that counts and so no matter whats around the corner, if you brought at 80p plus, it must be tough hearing others tell you to be more patient.
I'm prob one of the luckier ones here in that I brought in when the SP was lower, but I can understand why some are feeling hard done by.
Zoom out though and its more a sector issue than simply company to me.
9 out of 10 microcap miners/explorers have tanked 70% plus over last 18 months.
Now with TG, there is a lot of questions to be answered, including how they plan to buy Pranagraf (given Indian law blocked the last attempt), but equally, I've seen nothing to suggest they plan to take TG private and delist.
Those suggesting that are making bold, non evidence based guesses, which could come true, but the same risk would apply to all microcaps.
There seems to be lots of smaller raises occuring lately.
Is that due to only needing little bits to tie the company over until the expected and much hyped larger package comes in or because it is struggling to raise more in one go?
Always so many questions.
I think one of the sentiment downsides came to be due to the company making a lot of noise about "capacity" numbers.
30k tpa capacity was hit, and expectations were capacity would result in like minded production numbers.
Fast forward a few reports and it became clear production was a long way off expectations and as such all the dreamy ideas of self funding expansion went out of the window, near term at least.
The earlier bullish company projections gave over the impression ramp up would have been swifter and greater than it turned out to be.
Economies of scale have resulted in the margins being non existent at such low production numbers.
Solving this is a monetry problem, but that can be solved. The main issue is timeframes. The recent RNS does suggest we arent yet at 18k tpa, given it stated that number was the goal still.
Hitting 18k tpa is a milestone, but equally still below what I'm sure many would have expected by today.
Even 36k tpa is a lot less than Im sure most want given statements like 400 k tpa by 2030 (8% of global market) have been made by the company as a target.
The slower ramp up is a delay. 2024 feels like a year of trying to achieve what was expected to be achieved last year by year end, so def a delay, but in the grand scheme of things, for mining, not the end of the world.
If anything, it might work out well considering how low basket prices are at present. Remember, every ton sold at such prices is a ton less in the ground.
If it takes a bit longer to ramp up, and if prices did rise by then, it might not all be so bad.
Challenges ahead, but each one solved is one less to face.
I have no reason to think you do short bebeto.
On the subject though of GCAT, I don't think it would fit that Q1,2,3 4 narative as such, simply due to size imo. For a larger company, yes, but GCAT, dispite the several hundred employees line, leadership wise appears very thin on the ground. Again, I revert back to my small cap comments in previous post. Almost all small caps dont report mirrored quarter updates, which I guess is because by virtue of being "small", they are still in the hiccup stages and thus one quarter to the next is littered with challenges.
Generally, I tend to think its not so much about the hiccup but more how it is dealt with that is important when things are still developing. Thats the biggest tell on if management has what it takes.
From a technical point of view, I don't think you could argue with your comment bebeto that a ramper will cost you more than a deramper. Which in its own right, is an interesting topic, but one for another day no doubt.
I genuinely think maybe a little gets to read into with some less positive posters agenda here. Legal for example, is imo, one of the most switched on investors Ive met, and bebeto, while heavily negative towards RM, seems logical. Lets be frank here. The share is suspended, for a 2nd year in a row, for missing accounting deadlines. Thats a failure of senior management no matter how you look at it to me.
GCAT isnt over yet though and while its still jam tomorrow, arent all small caps like that?
There is def a lot of hurdles to overcome and big room for improvements here, but thats why its a risk v reward type of hold to me. If it was risk free, it would be several hundred mil mcap and hitting big production numbers with little SP upside left.
No such thing as a safe stock, and small caps are super risky, which is why I feel both points of view are so important as they help the deep dive that is required to survive the small cap world.
Isnt balance having and hearing both sides Swampie? Overall, I'm generally the more forgiving type of holder, but in equal measure don't like to bury my head in any sand. Of course, you get the more strategic type pop up from time to time either crazy bullish or mega bearish, but by and large I would say most of the reg posters hear seem pretty level headed.
I think it would be a shame if it was to become a place only "everything is mega" or "everything is horrid" type of board. For me, LSE's main strength is its varity of views. The worst echo chambers seem to be tele gram groups, so I'm hoping the likes of JC and yourself, do stay.
On the subject of the ceo/company reading these boards. It does happen. When PJ was CEO or POW I recall he mentioned in an interview from time to time he would pop on and have a read.
I'm not sure its for investees or anything else other than we all like secretly know what others think of our work.
Weren't you spamming this board last year Greg telling everyone 400 plus % rises were on the cards within weeks at points?
I rarely do this, but I'm calling you out as a market manipulator who hypes or trashes a stock depending on if your going long or short.
JC, Happy NYE btw mate (and all).
I don't disagree that the accounts are not simple and in that your point makes sense. However, I'm not sure that is an acceptable excuse for a main (or even non main) listed company. This isn't a self employed annual return here we are talking about, but rather a company which as the bare min is required to submit its accounts on time, amongst other things.
Now, that doesn't remove how hard it might be, or the decision making of account or ops (Robbie choose ops) when funds were so low closure must have been at stake. But it must remove investor confidence to the wider market surely? A company not able to even complete its accounts on time, year on year, regardless of reasons, surely comes over as poorly managed?
Thats the concern (or a) concern this situation raises.
Robbie in terms of CEO responibilities has in my mind failed epicly and let investors down. Yes the markets have been hard, yes OCIM fell through last minute, but thats par of the course. Resources have been spent under his watch, in maybe the wrong areas at the wrong time.
So far, nothing has yet proven that to have changed. A open, but equally hyping TG group interview 1 day before suspension doesn't equal a change to me.
Change for GCAT will be delivering on their promises.
Just back in April GCAT put out a timeline showing about 8 milestone moments which would be completed by year end 2023. I'm pretty sure 0 were completed. That presentation was put out long after OCIM fell through as that over promising was a curse before and appears a curse still. So naturally its understandable trust isnt what it once was.
Q1 will help us know if Robbie has over promised again in his TG group interview or this time delivers on his words (prospectus sorted, funfing in, expansion started). If he delivers then all the past will be forgotton quickly imo and regardless of past failures, no doubt his praises will be sung.
For balance
Failures
1: Over promising, 2: OCIM, 3: Missed targets, 4: Resource alignment, 5: Accounting suspensions, 6: Prospectus timeframes, 7: Shareholder value
Successes
1: Stepping up (crediting company etc), 2: Resilence (not walking away), 3: High Grade (without decision to look into high grade area we might have gone under already.
A fair point that Legal.
It would have also been nice to have seen a copy of said review as tbh it feels like it was all hot air.
It might not have been hot air, but it didnt stop them failing to meet accounting deadlines again.
Two years in a row is a poor performance. I don't see how that can be seen as anything else or defended tbh.
As a company, GCAT hasn't been well run in terms of the admin side. The jam tomorrow line has allowed Robbie to live to fight another day, but soon he will have to start delivering to re-gain confidence here imo as admin is important and not something that can be taken as a side thought.
I had hoped things would change as personal changed, but yet to see that.
Robbie seems more well suited to the operations side to me, where in terms of mine development, killi is getting there, step by step, albeit slower than promised many times.
In terms of the SP i don't think there's any hiding from the fact its been a totall shower of the brown stuff. 150 plus to today is aweful, no doubt.
Zoom out though and a lot of the market has suffered the same fate, with hundreds of stocks tanking by 75% plus since their highs.
Many reasons for each, but not all are related to each company. One thing often forgotton is those previous highes might not have been fair value. 2021 for example cause a massive overpriced spike in a lot of small caps, led off the back of a covid furlough boom, whereby many where sat at home with nought to do and money to burn.
Those highes then get referenced as though they were fair value, when for a lot they were a bubble spike price.
Also, inflation ec has hit small caps hard as those same investors felt a pinch on there pockets.
TG has also underperformed in terms of not hitting production targets
Combine all 3 and here you are today.
SP is all that counts but sometimes theres a story forgotton behind its movements.
Not every gain is because a company is doing well, likewise for vice versa.
Correction RNS's aren't uncommon and its really a "nothing to see here" thing.
The next report is what I'm waiting on. We have had expectations amended and set during the last report so we all know roughly what those figures should show if all has gone smoothly. If so, thats great. If it hasnt, and sometimes things dont go smoothly then its all about how they are/have dealt with it.
Problems occur. Thats mining. So far they seem to be dealing with them fine to me.