Andrada Mining acquisition elevates the miner to emerging mid-tier status. Watch the video here.
This month/year/4 weeks.
"Hmm, tomorrow is Saturday. Guess you'll have to wait a bit!"
In honesty due to health issues I haven't been out of bed much in about a month so days merge a little.
"My understanding is that it's a global commodity trader, think Cargill, Glencore, Trafigura, Vitol, etc (examples, not saying it's one of them specifically). Not a household name, but huge in the industry and with a global reach."
Indeed, I also don't think it matters much who.
Indeed this is why I posted my observation on the Shell thread. It's hard to fake that sort of sputtering thankfulness. I might have to sell a different share to buy more Quadrise tomorrow.
One thing I noted on a rewatch was Jason's tone when he spoke about Vicky's appointment - it was almost a "thank the Lord she agreed" sort of thing.
"Next week I expect a coordinated PR roll out by MSC and Shell"
Quite a statement sunshine. I only have hope.
I always find Olympic sized swimming pools the odd one, they are really quite rare.
And you're posting ten pints in.
I mean the reality is, if you believe in the company you own the shares and if you believe the company will fail you don't own the shares.
"Quite a difference."
Oh completely - I just meant it's irrelevant without hindsight.
Indeed. 1.2 or 1.29 or 1.8 is largely irrelevant long term.
The share price is unbelievably low when considering the data released to the market over the past week. Boggles the mind really.
Correct, and they have little connection to us anyway. And...are 99.9% down since inception.
"It can't be proven that I negatively impacted others' choices in taking up the offer, though I do know the company got my cash."
Hey man I'm not blaming you or anything I just think it's an interesting point. I mean, it can be proven that you selling into the market, any market, exerts downward pressure on the share price because that's what always happens. And you say the company "got your money". But they got the money of the nameless person who bought your shares in the market rather than buying them in the open offer. Again, this is just a theoretical weirdness of two competing markets for the same product.
"Can you explain? It enabled me to take up my allocation and the company to receive the funding, rather than me buying shares in the open market, which the company would have received no money from."
Quite correct, and this is a bit theoretical but your reasoning works both ways - if the share price and open offer price are equal, anyone can do this. Even the company itself, can fund itself - a bit like a reverse repo. Essentially you sold into the market, contributed to a lower market price and put that money into the company. But if you didn't, the market price would have been proportionately higher than the open offer price making what you did a worse deal for everyone else and encouraging uptake of the open offer.
"they had their chance of cheap stock and many blew the chance, as such they should not be given a second chance"
I don't think biblical vengeance against pensioners is the winning strategy you think it is.
"I sold a number of shares in the market to fund the open offer"
Don't think this does anything. Money is fungible. I think a major cause of the low take-up was indeed the proximity of the market price.
We have a product for every stage of their transition. And everyone else's.
MSC will have to refuel 100% of its fleet at some point soon. Maybe it won't be 100% bioMSAR but they can't stay with the status quo
No, and I very much doubt they'd be able to answer.
"An event we're promised a repeat of next month"
The probability of any long term pre-commercialised company have previously failed is roughly 100%.
"Could lightning strike twice?"
With a considerably lower probability, yes.
"So 4p in 4 months time???"
No, more. This is now, still, priced for bankruptcy. In fact it seems to be priced lower than that.