We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
I think its worth remembering Jim Mellon makes most of his money from ANIC via the third party he owns which provides consultancy work to ANIC and is paid a large percent all based on ANICs increase in NAV.
Last year it caused a lot of uproar as the NAV went up, but the SP had dropped.
A sceptic would think that the buy back is a part of appeasing us holders by increasing the SP so there is less moaning if Jim in effect pays himself another very large sum if the company has a NAV increase again.
Regardless of if that is the motives here or not, for me share buy backs are always a positive as it reduces shares in issue and increases your profits via the SP lift and as a holder, Id much rather be sat at 15p than at 10p.
Hey Fill,
It's an interesting point about plant 2. I need to re-read previous RNS's as can't recall what plant 2 refers too.
In terms of cashflow, I don't know how much we have spare as Mill End are still owed a decent amount, so that could eat up a lot of the income (if we did pay via shares after prospectus approval). However, it does feel like some money is filtering through to lab work etc. I'm also working on the fact the only reason we can turn profit right now is because of the high grade on the hill we found recently, but that has a shelf life to how long it might last.
I don't know the answer to this, but without additional capacity expansion can the company stay profitable long term? I'm leaning towards a no or close to break even.
I strongly disagree Legal. The purpose of this board is surely to discuss all areas.
Yes if the financing fails it would be a somewhat pointless topic, but isn't that the same for every small cap pretty much.
What you or I focus on or write wont change a thing, so what good does only focusing on that do? And in turn, what harm does a distraction create? I can't see any.
If you were to extend your view, then you could argue no one should ever post or chat about anything on any small cap other than financing ever. We both own or post on some of the same stocks elsewhere too, and bottom line is without financing they are all knackered to, yet post away we do. Isn't that the whole point of forums? Why is GCAT limited to finance only, when that applies to every stock out there (as in making money is needed).
I get for you, you might not want to think of anything else, but in that case, why would it matter if others do? Why would you try to keep the focus on an item you have no control over or say in?
For me, we have gone over the importance of finance 100's of times and having a discussion about something else is.....fun.
Its also informative. Yes it might be time wasted, but in the nicest of ways Legal I'm not sure as someone who spends a lot of time on here, yet doesn't own the stock, you are best placed to suggest what is well spent time.
That may sound harsh, but with full respect, I created to a topic to discuss Vim info, and you have hijacked it by suggesting reponses would be a waste of time, which seems somewhat uneeded and unhelpful.
As a standard I do find your posts very insightful, but in this case it feels like you are fixated on one area and that fixation is stiffling wider discussions, for fun, for info, for insight.
I do agree on the first bit Legal, although I got the impression lack of cash paused VIM work.
On the 2nd point about financing. I'm not yet sure we could say. They are (alledged) working on a deal with someone and I don't think it matters what you have, DD work takes time. Every company that shows interest will want to do their own DD pretty much from scratch and best will in the world thats a min 6 month job, if not 9 to 12 months. So unless it falls through, I don't think we can yet say no deal is on the cards.
When it comes to Vim directly, we must remember its all taken from relatively small drills. Its like when you look at an MRE or JORC and people quote that JORC amount as though that is what you have, when it isn't. Its a loose, rough guess taken from more basic info. Financiers tend to only take into account more sure Indicated/Measured resources and ignore the inferred resources. To this end, VIM, while holding potential, on paper prob doesn't add much weight....yet.
And that yet bit is my question really. I know, you know, we all know trust is lacking and finance is needed, but moving away from that much done topic for one moment, what does Vim's results so far show?
I always love to bring up Vim Rutha every now and then and for good reason too.
Recently Robbie mentioned in his interview that they believe (not proved), that VIM could be a 40 plus year LOM plot producing several hundred k of Oz per annum.
Now that's some statement as would put it at around 9 mil Oz MRE.
Of course, its well worth taking that with a pinch of salt as was more his hope than factual, but in the recent drill core pics Jaybike noticed the boxes had VMR marked on them. Might mean nothing, could mean Vim Rutha.
Granted, walk before you run and Killi Hill needs sorting first, but I guess to break up a bit of the gloom and doom feeling surrounding GCAT right now, anyone want to share actual known details of Vim Rutha, i.e. current results and possible strike lengths just to help keep it in our minds.
I'm sure the strike length was looking like 4.5 km and beyond based on initial drills (not massively infilled mind).
Depth is needed.
And thats my point really Watcher. Yes for us it feels forever, but to the lawyers, its just standard in many ways. I always found they never lived in the real commercial world and would almost happily let a company go under awaiting a contract over signing off a risk point.
Legal, while technically I don't think the company would go under if the deal fell through, I do think from an investment point of view for us PI's it would be a very long and hard road back, which again, reaffirms my view that I would rather take a little longer now getting it over the line correctly, than fudge it through and come unstuck on a small detail.
Maybe I am and don't get me wrong Legal "close" has been the wording for months now, however, having worked on large (hundreds of Millions in value) contracts myself before, I no first hand how time can run away from you. I've seen what appears to be small minor legal points go back and forth between legal teams, meeting after meeting, simply because sometimes neither side wants to find a middle ground.
So yes, you would have hoped this was sorted by now, its importance for the company to me means if it takes a bit longer, so be it.
Financing is def key here for sure. Last fall through has added 10 months so far to the delays and increased debt owed to unpaid CLNs, which in turn reduced available capital as some was used to pay off a part of Mill Ends deal.
I think RM and the team will also be very aware of this too and tbh its no easy challenge to secure financing in todays climate so if RM can pull off this side of Xmas, then hats off to him. I know many will view this as a "has he learnt his lessons" thing, but I'm not sure securing financing falls under that bracket as its so complicated. The main lesson from last time was over hyping the deal before it was drawn down (which to be fair every CEO does on small caps). This time round RM has been a lot more cautious by refusing to give timeframes but has said "its close" many times.
I would imagine RMs job depends on the success of securing this finance too as I can't see how he could survive the revolt if it fell through again.
If it gets secured though, it really should remove a lot of the anxeity surrounding this stock. It doesn't mean other hurdles wont arise, they always do and often unexpectedly, but knowing the cash is available to upgrade to a better financial place would be very very welcome news.
Hi Dale,
I can totally see your point of view and have no doubt the intension is well placed but I personally wouldn't agree with that statement in full.
I think a lot depends on whose eye is the beholder. I'm sure there many out there who do require confirmation via positive posts to either buy in or keep holding, but equally, some get put off by that as mad as that might sound.
Realisum isn't strictly being negative. SOG did also post a very positive outlook too within the same message.
There have been individuals and certain groups pushing only positive spin and trying to use cancel culture for anyone non positive since 1p plus with this stock.
If you had listened to them you would be very heavyily down.
End of the day making money is surely the aim of investing, and I can't see how that is helped by putting a head in the sand to anything not so great.
Outlandlish negative posts or positive posts are no help to anyone, but I can't really disagree with what SOG posted tbh as if the funding doesn't come in in full, or is very dilutive, a fall in SP would be expected, but likewise, if in full and non dilutive, a rise would be.
That feels balanced and sensible to me, which I much prefer to someone intentionally trying to spin me a line just to trick me into buying more.
As a holder, of course I want the SP to rise, which if that finance gets sorted hopefully it will.
Dale, its basically what Folio said.
To add a bit more to that within stocks there is not actually such a thing as a buy or a sell, only a matched transcation.
If you wanted to "sell" your shares, you can only do that if someone else also wants to buy them aka liquidity. So every sell has a buy attached to it too.
LSE like pretty much everywhere else then tries to report this as a sell or buy depend on where the bid and ask was. Its just a representation of senitment thats all.
If a match happens around the mid price, LSE has to guess but thats no different to any other platform.
Remember, every completed transcation is a matched transcation between a buyer and a seller, with the MM/Broker taking a small amount for matching the deal which was the spread.
That is the downside to tweets, if something isn't mentioned which usually is, it can cause concerns.
For me, unless its in an RNS I'm not overly weighing it into anything, be that positive or negative.
I love the tweets, but you always have to remember the poster can be anyone. Time pushed week and that task can be given to an admin clerk.
@Watcher. I was, although looking back it was scary how aweful I was and how little I knew. So many of my investments were brought on the back of things like "a mate just brought". I honestly don't know how I didn't lose everything lol.
Market crashes happen, so do market bull runs. Always have. Its part of the investment cycle to me. The world didn't end, no matter who caused what and some very profitable years followed too, as is the case after market crashes.
If I had sold up everything, moved to a field in the middle of nowhere and never reinvested anything after 2008, I would have missed a great bull run.
So swings and roundabouts to me. That doesn't mean I don't buy in and out of shares, of course I do. I've been investing long enough to know there are up and down periods and I prefer to be out before a down, but of course that's easier said than done and not always timed right.
If your arguement was "hey, I see further downside coming before next leg up", I would get it. But it doesn't appear to be that. It appears to be, whole thing will crash and never return, which I don't believe and no matter how many times someone writes "fact" or "awake" or "truth" within a statement, I'm still not likely to believe.
I've said before and will say again, your views I respect, but it never feels like you respect others sometimes Watcher. I really struggle to understand why you feel the need to force them onto a GCAT lse chat? At times, its just so random, and I mean that as respectfully as I can.
Your whats coming next thing, isnt a fact, its a belief, no one on this planet can claim fact for anything which hasn't yet occurred, and adding your belief as an ending statement does you a diservice imo mate.
No one wants to be like that drunk dude in the pub who just wont leave you alone even though you have repeatedly told them your not interested.
Smellaine,
It is true to say the world has always been nie and every generation has always had its promoters of the end being near, be that financial or environmental or diaster related. Needless to say every time they have been proven wrong, but one day they will of course be right.
Within each of those generations, everyone had facts to prove they were right, and so probability wise, not heeding the advice, at least historically, would have proven the best financial result.
In terms of delisting, I'm not sure I would agree that they aren't gaining from being listed.
Yes as it stands today the wider markets (not just TGR) have suffered massively since those end of 2021 highs, but often is the case that business owners and large/high wealth individuals take a longer term view.
It has been known since its inception that markets go up and down over periods and thus also accepted as a norm. Did the main backers of other large companies try to delist during a down period? Or did they just ride it out? I don't have the stats but I would feel pretty confident most rode it out.
If they were to find a way and means to delist, this would not only have knock on effects for any required equity raises or potential capital investments, it would also remove their potentially massive gain from any SP uplift that might occur within the next 10 years.
As shareholders maximum value for them wouldn't be to delist in a poor market but rather to continue with their plans and sell their shares when the market is inflated and a lot of their aims have been achieved. If they hit there 400k, 8% 2030 target (yes very ambitious I know), then their shares could potentially be worth billions, not just several million. Alternatively, they might just enjoy a very handsome dividend kicker and not plan to sell at all, keeping the asset as a great family wealth creator.
Naturally, when one entity holds a large % (personally or via third party but self owned companies) it is always slightly concerning as power balances may seem skewed to their favour, but truth is that's not really much different from most other companies. Even ones where the majority of shares are held in public hands, usually result in AGM resolutions getting passed by 95% plus present votes. The fact is as a public investor, we are only ever really piggy backing on someone elses journey, but it can still work out well for us.
Your question however is of course valid, in that could they? To delist I think, but don't quote me, they would need above 75% agm, egm resolution approval. As it stands they don't control that much of the company, but lets picture they did and passed a resolution to delist, you would still own your shares, just you would now own a stake of a private company, not public. Unless they made you an offer and brought you out, your still a shareholder. Now you might be forced (but not hostile) to sell, but that can only happen if a really high number, can't remember figure but your talking 90% ish, voted and passed a forced sale of the remain 10% holders. Thats a lot of work for the Poddars to do to get to 90% ownership.
There is other ways and means i.e., create company (might be already created) and make a bid on TGR, which would then need shareholder approval or increasing stakes so they go over certain % thresholds which require them to make an offer etc, but again, I can't see that being the best option right now for them.
As a secondary note, the plots on their website are all still listed under the previous owner (Tyacks) with some active and others expired or pending renewal (think 3 plots are pending renewal but don't quote me). I would hunch at the pending renewal plots to be the ones GCAT tweeted about last week which they are awaiting mining license approvals on, but you can't rule out the currently (Tyacks) active ones not getting updated either as most expire in 2025.
@Watcher, In answer to your question about mining licenses/permits etc. Tanzania has the Ministry of Minerals (which covers all areas) along with the Mining Commission. The firsts website can be found via google but is basically madini. Go . Tz and the 2nd one is the same but with tune madini before all the dotted part.
On the 2nd one you can download per financial year a list of granted license etc.
There is also lots of other info on there.
As a wider note, not just GCAT related license are often held under subsiderarys with different names by companies (which is how they allow stakes to be taken by countries where they are based etc). This isnt always the case, but worth noting whenever you search that your looking for the correct name.
On other stocks I've seen many a concerned investor because they were searching for a 100% like for like name on the permit and couldn't find it, then panicked, when actually all was well.
Hopefully that helps.
Not a problem Watcher and a decent reply if I may add.
Your response confirms to me my original thought point of view of, different view points should be welcomed, not cancelled, as after a little discussion you have highlighted your posts come from a place of concern for others and nothing else. So a kind action, which maybe had just not been presented in the best way possible, but still well intended none the less.
End of the day, in todays world, it is easy to jump to attack instead of taking the harder route of listening or just passing on by. But echo chambers are never a good thing imo. If 100 people in a room all think the same, they become blinded to reality by a constant state of re-affirment.
I strongly feel you learn the most from others with a different viewpoint, not always because they are right, but because if you question, you start and increase your research more in that subject, even if its just to prove them wrong (or in turn find out your wrong).
A great example would be Legal on here. As qn investor, we march to different drums, but their posts challenge my thoughts and thus have proved really useful to me.
I'm now guilty of off topicing myself lol, but I'm sure anyone not interested can just scroll on by.
What do you think of the Tanz JV talk bebeto? I appreciate little detail is out there yet other than RM saying the talk is of a partner taking it over and us retaining some value i.e., via % percent share or royalties etc.
If you top of your headed it, what sort of % you think we might keep, given they will need 15/25 mil to get it going.