Listen to our latest Investing Matters Podcast episode 'Uncovering opportunities with investment trusts' with The AIC's Richard Stone here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
I think some forget that we have 157m shares which we can sell to raise cash which are NON-DILUTIVE as already in issue.
So why go with a $10m loan?? Perhaps one reason is that if finance deal is close for a larger chunk of development costs, then really all running costs if ENSA based should come from that finance package and not through shareholders equity.
This may suggest a 2 tier strategy or split coming with ENSA being one part and then regionals and exploration spun off. The latter would need it's own finance package and that would be expected from equity/shareholders or via partner deals or incoming cash to use as directors see fit. But where ENSA is concerned... all finance is 'ring fenced'.
So there is a clue there for the smart investor.
Sorry to disturb some from your 'stack' of pointless posts.
Do not feed the animals. There is a sign around here somewhere but I think someones pitched a sleeping bag up against it.
As it stands, we'll reach the y/e without sufficient working capital for the next 12 months, and as such the accounts will have a qualification, which no company likes. Given that we could have avoided this by raising more funds, what does this tell us?
In my view it says the Board is very confident there will be a post-balance sheet event within a couple of months of the y/e which will be recorded in the accounts. We will still have the qualification, but any concern will be allayed by the new funding.
Addickt...IF we reach the Y/E without any takeover bids, there will be a substantial offtake agreement in place...
The Loan Facility won't need to be drawn because the SP will be very much higher and we will have been able to sell the CGP shares for at least 20p...
Based on the 31 Dec figures, monthly operational cash burn will surely be no more than $1m (they only have SIX core personnel), so...
Even £31 million (155 x 20p) gives us almost $40 million....enough to last 3 years...no qualification...etc etc...
RK, I said 'As it stands'. The rest of your post is speculation.
Redknight, why do you continue to refer that the facility is in place to cover us til y/e.
It wouldn't cover our costs till August.
I would say the $10m facility would be to douse any doubt or queries regarding the cash we hold presently which is about to be revealed in the MD&A (it is usually circulated on the 15th day of each quarter - surprised its not out today).
My guess is that they were hoping to have all permits and IPA signed off by now which would allow them to announce finance, yet they haven't concluded the CP's, and so a little debt facility is required to see out next 6 weeks The announcement was also used to nudge any current strategic shareholder (BHP and Newmont), that we are very advanced re financing (there is no way in hell they have been invited to support the next package, hence they would be thinking, do we move or miss out).
Redknight, why would they sell 150m shares at 20p, when:
1. they will soon announce a significant finance package shortly which will put a rocket under the SP (rerate to say 60p). and or;
2. wait for a bid to arrive post announcement re finance package, and sell the 150m when we are multiples of 60p?
Next steps:
Conclude ESIA
Execute IPA
Announce funding package
Rerate SP
Develop cascabel and or receive takeover bid/s
Rerate SP again
"Given that we could have avoided this by raising more funds, what does this tell us?"
How do you know we could have raised more funds, Add? Was that in the RNS or are you speculating?
Red, it would be nice to see the ESIA works illustrated as completed in the imminent MD&A
SH, for once you make a reasonable point. It's an assumption on my behalf based upon past performance and the bullish tone of yesterday's RNS.
BBG I will address both your key points:
1 I have not said it is there to cover us until the year end. I've said that at current operational cash burn it would cover us until at least the year end.
I have also said we may not draw on it at all depending on:
A How soon bidding starts and
B Finalising the major funding and
C A possible sharp in crease the SP that would ALLOW us to sell the CGP shares.
2 Indeed I am not saying we SHOULD sell the CGP shares at all...let alone at 20p...I was simply addressing addickts point about an accounts qualification suggesting that if the MGT COULD sell the CGP shares if needed to avoid qualification, at a price that I would expect to be at least 20p by Y/E based on the funding deal and/or takeover bid(s)
Hope this helps...
SolGold PLC - Ecuador-focused copper and gold exploration company - Celebrates "substantial progress" it has made in its financial initiatives. "Management is currently in detailed discussions with capital providers who have shown a strong interest in committing to a robust, longer-term financing package for the Cascabel project," SolGold explains, citing its flagship project in Ecuador. Additionally, it notes a USD10 million loan facility which provides an immediate cash infusion for its ongoing operations. Chief Financial Officer Chris Stackhouse says: "These developments are significant for SolGold as we continue to establish the financial foundations necessary for the next phases of the Cascabel project. The strong interest from potential financiers not only validates the project's exceptional prospects but also strengthens our capability to achieve planned milestones." The company adds that there is no guarantee of a finalised financing transactions, despite financing discussions advancing.
----------
By Tom Budszus, Alliance News slot editor
Comments and questions to newsroom@alliancenews.com