Andrada Mining acquisition elevates the miner to emerging mid-tier status. Watch the video here.
Don't want to be a killjoy here but is this game still fun?
It was started by Spikey so that he/she could keep on and on restating the prediction that the price would fall to 0.75p ... looks like even he/she has given up on that one !
Cheemap - I posted this a few days ago regarding the ACF report for your info ...
Using discounted cashflow calculations, ACF derive GBP values for EUA assets as follows (see page 12 of the report):
West Kytlim £33m (1.11p per share)
Semonovsky £12m (0.40p per share)
Monchetundra £192m (6.47p per share)
Monch. Flanks £1,476m (49.75p per share)
The risk-adjusted WACC values (WACC = cost of capital or annual discount) used by ACF in their discounted cashflows are 10% for WK, 12% for MT and 30% for MT Flanks. ACF note that the 30% discount for MT Flanks is higher because there is no license and no EPC in place.
Once the MT Flanks license is issued, the risk factor is obviously reduced and the value is obviously increased. For example, applying a discount factor of 12% to ACF cashflow figures for MT Flanks, I calculate a revised valuation of £4,430m for EUA's 80% share which equates to 149.3p per share, assuming £/$ of 1.30 and 2,967m shares.
Obviously these valuations don't translate into sale prices as the buyer will be taking the risk of getting into production but they do perhaps provide some idea of the parameters for negotiation ....
As usual all IMO and DYOR
Morning DarkEnergy
Can't claim M&A involvement but would agree seems that CITIC and VTB have probably been acting for buyers or as intermediaries. Is it possible that CITIC are part of one of the potential buyer groups? - hence the rather vague reason for suspension?
It will be interesting to see if there are any Opening Position Disclosures by parties holding >=1% in accordance with the Takeover Code. These are required within 10 business days I believe ...
"Rule 8 of the Takeover Code (the “Code”) sets out the circumstances in which Dealing Disclosures and/or Opening Position Disclosures are required to be made by the parties to an offer, persons acting in concert with them, persons with an interest in relevant securities of 1% or more and exempt principal traders (“EPTs”) connected with the parties to an offer."
Bluerill - sorry I couldn't resist it.
I don't think any of us can possibly know when the shares will resume trading, if at all.
I also don't agree that the only way for a price to be established is for the shares to resume trading - I think that is what you are saying.
Interesting viewpoint from seekingalpha on Nornickel:
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4356046-nornickel-will-pay-dividend-yield-of-10-for-10-years
Hi A1ex
That would be very interesting !
Given that MT is publicly up for sale, I do think the licensing authority will be asking .... who are we actually issuing this license to ? What is their production plan etc?!
GL
Dealer - fwiw I would guess that EUA intend to stay suspended until the flanks license is issued. IMO EUA may have suspended to avoid large stakes being built at low sp.
Impossible to know how close the license may be of course, but the original MT license took around 6 months from MoD approval and it is now around 6 months from the MoD approval for the flanks in Dec-19 .... so maybe it is about due, assuming no delays due to Covid impacts. Having said that I think there could well be some 'complications' with the license issue or 'clarifications' required in view of the prospective buyers circling ...
Using discounted cashflow calculations, ACF derive GBP values for EUA assets as follows (see page 12 of the report):
West Kytlim £33m (1.11p per share)
Semonovsky £12m (0.40p per share)
Monchetundra £192m (6.47p per share)
Monch. Flanks £1,476m (49.75p per share)
The risk-adjusted WACC values (WACC = cost of capital or annual discount) used by ACF in their discounted cashflows are 10% for WK, 12% for MT and 30% for MT Flanks. ACF note that the 30% discount for MT Flanks is higher because there is no license and no EPC in place.
Once the MT Flanks license is issued, the risk factor is obviously reduced and the value is obviously increased. For example, applying a discount factor of 12% to ACF cashflow figures for MT Flanks, I calculate a revised valuation of £4,430m for EUA's 80% share which equates to 149.3p per share, assuming £/$ of 1.30 and 2,967m shares.
Obviously these valuations don't translate into sale prices as the buyer will be taking the risk of getting into production but they do provide some idea of the parameters for negotiation ....
As usual all IMO and DYOR
I would recommend anyone genuinely interested in EUA to read this report as it sets out a transparent calculation of the asset values. Base data and assumptions are all stated so that anyone can make adjustments to the calculations if there is something they disagree with. This is in contrast to the usual style of broker notes, which tend to state a price target without any detailed backup to show how the figures have been calculated.
I think the point about the ACF report is not really who wrote it but that it provides a totally transparent calculation of asset values. All the numbers and assumptions are clearly set out so that anyone can follow the calculation and adjust any assumptions that they disagree with to get to their own valuation. Similarly the assumptions can be updated as things develop - e.g. the very conservative discount factor for the MT flanks can be updated when the license is issued.
The statement about the report being intended for professional investors is surely just the equivalent of saying - this is not investment advice ...