||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
Real-Time news about Bullion Res (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
|stevea171: Date: March 08, 2005
The Sad Saga Of Bullion Resources Ends And A Bright Future Opens As Nautical Petroleum.
It has taken a while, but the long suffering shareholders in Bullion Resources can look their bank managers in the face once again. Credit has to be given to Malcolm Burne of Golden Prospect who was determined not to take a loss on his holding and he was supported by Colin Bird of Lion Mining and Jubilee Platinum. Without wanting to dwell too much on the past, Bullion Resources' shares performed badly after the IPO in 2002. An independent report by Lion Mining the following year concluded tht the South African assets of the company were not economically viable and the South African mining regulators criticised the Competent Person's Report on which the listing was based. In due course four of the directors resigned and their shares were acquired by Golden Prospect. Litigation again the Competent Person is still under advice and the Nomad - our old friends at Grant Thornton - was replaced.
In October 2004 Bullion Resources sold its assets, such as they were, and underwent a restructuring to become a cash shell. As part of the restructuring the company raised £625,000 through a non-brokered placing and the directors evaluated a number of deals to make the best use of its listing and funds. The decision in the end was to carry out a reverse takeover of a company called Nautical Holdings by issuing shares to a value of £20.93 million. The name is going to be changed to Nautical Petroleum and the shares started trading again today, once the deal had been announced. Bullion Resources shares had been suspended at 6.25p after a quick advance in the share price a few weeks ago and they started trading again today at 10.5p, a rise of 68 per cent.
Note to Phil the Spin and the nomads and brokers involved with his companies, the suspension of Bullion Resources was requested after the shares had risen by 30 per cent, not thirteen fold as in the case of White Nile.
Nautical Holdings is a subsidiary of Masefield Energy Holdings which was created last year to hold the non-trading , asset based business interests of the Masefield Group. The Group also has an energy trading company, Masefield AG, which is involved in global trading of crude oil and refined products in major oil trading hubs and its clientele includes most of the participants in the global crude oil, gas and refined products markets. As a result of this business it has been able to identify and secure assets and interests which benefit from synergies with energy trading, while offering intrinsic viability and competitive advantage through application of oil process technology.
This is an important point as Masefield Energy has identified and acquired heavy oil reserves in the North Sea as a prime supply source for the downstream processed fuel business. The two licences are contiguous and are situated on the East Shetland Platform in the vicinity of the well-documented Bressay and 9/3 heavy oil discoveries. Key to this whole operation was the acquisition by Masefield Energy of specialised heavy crude oil production processing equipment designed and supplied by Halliburton for the Extended Well Test programme undertaken successfully on the Mariner oil field by Texaco in 1997.
Nautical Holdings has a 75 per cent interests in the licences and full ownership of the specialised oil production process equipment. The aim of the company is to lead a new phase in the development of known heavy oil reserves in the North Sea by applying advanced oil recovery technology, according to Ian Williams who will take over as chairman of Nautical Petroleum following the change of name. Mr Williams spent over 27 yrs with Royal Dutch/Shell Group before joining Masefield and ended up as Head of Strategy and Consultancy (Downstream) at Shell International Petroleum Company in London. He knows a bit about oil as does the proposed CEO, Stephen Jenkins who has 20 years technical and management experience in exploration and production world-wide with a range of oil and gas companies behind him..
The future of the business is therefore in experienced hands and Minesite can now hand over to Oilbarrel.com to follow it. The past can now be forgotten, but it was a salutary experience for London's junior mining sector. Hopefully the AIM regulators will take on board the fact that mining companies are not the same as widget manufacturers , food processors or transport companies. Advisers have to have more than a working knowledge of mining and be able to assess reports from Independent Consultants with competence. Only then will investors be confident that another Bullion Resources cannot slip through the gate.
|wole: The new shares will form 90% of the issued shares. The new holders are locked in for 12 months therefore there can't be much liquidity in the stock for a while. That said they may issue shares to institutional investors to improve liqidity.
At 3p the new company will be valued at roughly £23m. At 10p the mkt cap will be something like £78m.
If they stick to the proposals and start drilling and producing 25000 barrel per day the share price would probably be above the £1 mark.|
|greenspamster: Aim would have made them suspend the share. Hopefully as being in talks for so long and the fact share actually began to move that the deal is a done deal. Just depends how good the project/company that is being reversed in. If a good oil exploration play (look at COP or MDL) then we could be in for a nice rollercoaster share price ride.|
|stevea171: Suspended pending talks that may lead to a reverse takeover.
Bullion Resources PLC
15 February 2005
Bullion Resources plc (the 'Company')
The Company notes the share price movement today and wishes to announce that it
is in advanced stage talks which, if completed, will amount to a reverse
takeover of the Company. The Directors have therefore requested an immediate
suspension of the shares from trading on AIM.|
|greenspamster: The only thing about that is that they might do something to get the share price moving given that they have a personal stake now (in particular Malcom Burne rather then Golden Prospect). Anyone any info on how to get shares in the private placing.|
|simonevans: Yes, another sure sign that we are over the peak in the mining sector bull run imo. Not much froth in the share price of Bullion though!|
|charlesparker: Simon, no followers is a good thing!
The stampede for gold juniors will put this on the radar.
Despite the dreadful performance to date, a new helmsman and projects should provide support on the share price, touch 5.5-6p (unchanged)
Patience needed for newsflow.|
|energyi: HERE's the EARLIER Article
"Clouds over Bullion Resources"
By: David McKay ... Posted: 2002/11/20 Wed 19:19 ZE2 | © Mineweb 1997-2003
LONDON -- Bullion Resources [LSE:BLO] is under fire from South Africa's Geological Society which claims the UK-listed company is providing shareholders with misleading information regarding the viability of its gold resources. The allegation has been rejected by Jonny van den Berg, managing director of Bullion Resources, however. He told Mineweb that high grade mining methods and management's entrepreneurial approach would make the projects work.
A number of South African mining figures are non-executives on Bullion Resources' board including Standard Bank precious metals analyst, David Davis; Sanlam fund manager, Dawie Roodt; and Anthony Ogilvie Thompson, son of Julian Ogilvie Thompson, former executive chairman and chief executive of South African mining house, Anglo American.
The complaint was sent down by the South African Geological Society for a peer committee review which subsequently found missing or misleading information in the competent persons report of Bullion Resources' initial public offering document. This included important historical information regarding gold mining resources situated in South Africa's so-called Far West Rand region. "If you'd known who had owned these projects formerly and what had happened you'd never have put your money in this project," said one source.
Bullion Resources has three main projects of which two, Drylands and New Machavie, have been in several hands before, but have never been developed.
Van den Berg said his company, however, intended to high grade its projects; in addition, the gold price market had changed considerably improving the economic prospects of the mining ventures (break-even is esimated at a gold price of $200 per ounce). A third aspect of the company's strategic plan was that the projects would enable the company to participate in buying more tenements. This was in terms of government's drive to liberate so-called sterile mineral rights.
Van den Berg added that Bullion Resources was buying second hand mill components at heavily discounted prices which reduced the amount of total project capital required. This placed less pressure on cash flow and reduced the company's entry level by about 20 percent. "On two of the projects we will only mine 40 percent of the gold that is contained, effectively picking out the eyes," Van den Berg said.
Jurisdiction a problem
Bullion Resources will live or die by its ability to turnaround its relatively old projects with first production likely in 12 months. However, the question of the viability of Bullion Resources' projects highlights a long-standing problem regarding jurisdiction.
As a company listed on the UK's Alternative Investment Market (AIM), Bullion Resources is not required to meet all of the resource and reserve regulations laid down in South Africa's SAMREC reporting code even though the company operates in South Africa. Andy Clay, a consultant with Venmyn Rand in South Africa, describes AIM's requirements as "wide as a door".
In addition, Bullion Resources' competent persons report was signed off by Dr. Deon Vermaak who is registered with the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professions (SACNASP), a body established by government in its Natural Scientific Professions Act, 1993 (Act 106).
This means that the Geological Society nor the SAMREC committee is able to take the probity of the competent persons' report further and is dependent on aspirant umbrella society, the South African Institute for Minerals and Metallurgy (SAIMM) to intervene, an step it is currently reluctant to do. European Union regulations, shortly to be introduced, could force companies to conform to regulations in the country of operation as well as the country of registration, but this has yet to be proven.
South Africa has a poor record of junior mining activities in the past. One of the most controversial was the listing of Noble Minerals in 1999, an entity that claimed large manganese deposits when, in fact, the projects were long known to be worthless. Noble Minerals' share price plummeted soon after listing but not before management had pre-sold its shares to some unfortunate shareholders.
The Johannesburg Stock Exchange has plans to create its own venture capital market in a similar fasion to AIM. Government will also hope to see a proliferation of junior mining companies as the effects of the black empowerment charter in mining takes hold. It is for these two reasons that the question of upholding reporting standards and taking action against sub-standard reporting, preferably in line with SAMREC, is becoming such an important issue.
and a RESPONSE:
Comment on Clouds over Bullion Resources
Date 2002/11/21 Thu
Name Roger Dixon ... Email Address
Subject Clouds over Bullion Resources
Your comment on the ability of The Geological Society or SAMREC to take action against Mr Vermaak is incorrect. Mr Clay who you quote should also know this, bearing in mind that he is also a consultant in the earth sciences field. If the competent person in the Bullion case has contravened the code of ethics of the Geological Society and if he is a member of that society, then the society will,after careful consideration of the case to be in a position to remove the offender from there membership list with the associate ramifications.
The constant referral to the Noble Minerals case that occurred prior to the publishing of the SAMREC code is damaging to the South African industry and begs the question as to why it is constantly regurgitated.
Critiscm and comment from fellow consultants as opposed to consideration by the relevant professional institutions is a cause for concern.
from the GEOLOGIST:
Comment on Clouds over Bullion Resources
Date 2002/11/27 Wed
Name Deon Vermaakt
Email Address [email protected]
Subject "Clouds over Bullion" Complaint
Kindly forward the identity(ies) address(es) and contact detail(s) of the complainant(s) of the alleged complaint referred to in the third paragraph of your said article. To date hereof I have not received any complaint whatsoever from anybody or any information about the alleged complaint from the GSSA, SAMREC or SACNASP|
|energyi: From the MiningWeb thread:
Comment on More trouble for Bullion Resources ... Date 2002/12/05 Thu
Name Donald ... Email Address
Subject Who is responsibile this time?
Paragraph 1 indicates that the share price of Bullion resource has dropped since the first report in Mineweb. Later in the article there are indications that the first report was incorrect and that actions attributed to persons and governing bodies had not taken place at all. If this is the case, should Mineweb be held responsible for the drop in price and be required to reimburse any loss in earnings?
Allowing a report to be published that is inacurate smacks of manipulation at some level, especially when the facts could easily have been verified. Will all future reports from Mineweb also be manipulated for sensationalism? If Vermaakt should be punished for his report, Mineweb should be punished for theirs.
Subject What is most incorrect?
A geologist helping a company inflate Ore Reserves to scalp shareholders or a journalist getting confused about professional body disciplinary procedures?
Name Donald ... Email Address
Subject SAMREC definitions
The geologist is inferred, the journalist is proven.
Name David McKay ... Email Address [email protected]
Subject Nameless, faceless etc
You're very bold but, typically, you are also anonymous. Why not put your name behind your comments as I do? That way we know whose in the ring. For what it's worth, I'll reply to your comments which seek to cast doubts on my article.
The story clarified two aspects: that the Geological Society had not officially lodged a complaint at the time of the article (but has since - apologies for being ahead of the curve!), and that two of the prospects owned by Bullion Resources had been developed before whereas I said that had never been brought to account.
We corrected the inaccuracies in line with Mineweb's dedication to transparency, debate and discussion. The rest of the story stands and looks to have been of use to shareholders and general readers.
Thanks Donald. Your drivel about media accountability has already been forgotten.
......... David McKay|
|energyi: IPO was 40p: Unhappy Investors?
= = =
CONTROVERSY: ... From MiningWeb:
More trouble for Bullion Resources / By: David McKay
Posted: 2002/12/03 Tue 07:00 | © Mineweb 1997-2002
JOHANNESBURG -- Bullion Resources [LSE:BLO], the UK-listed gold producer operating in South Africa, has stood behind its resource statements saying the author of its competent persons' report (CPR), Deon Vermaakt, would defend his findings if a formal complaint was lodged. Bullion Resources' share price has fallen 18 percent since Mineweb published its report on 20 November. Bullion Resources, listed on London's Alternative Investment Market (AIM), is currently trading at 17.5 pence per share.
There is a high possibility Vermaakt will be called to account as the Geological Society of South Africa (GSSA) confirmed today that it had issued a formal complaint to the South African Council for Natural Scientists (SACNAS). SACNAS is a professional organisation of which Vermaakt is a registered member. GSSA vice president, Dawie van Wyk, said in a memo to Mineweb on 21 November that the CPR in Bullion Resources' prospectus could be misleading and that the resources were overstated.
"After a number of professional geologists all with experience in gold mineralisation in the Bullion Resources resource areas and who have reported and worked in the area, studied the CPR, they all concurred that the report could be misleading and the gold resources were overstated and they recommended to the Council of the GSSA that a complaint be lodged against Dr Vermaakt with SACNAS. This has been approved by the GSSA council and a formal complaint will be lodged with SACNAS," Van Wyk said.
Van Wyk added in statement today that the complaint was lodged via e-mail and followed by a registered letter signed by the President of the GSSA. "SACNAS, however, requires that the complaint is in the form of an affidavit and the GSSA is in the process of doing this," Van Wyk said.
Van Wyk was also anxious to clarify two points. Firstly, the onus was on SACNAS to take action as neither the GSSA nor SAMREC, South Africa's resources reporting committee, had jurisdiction over Vermaakt. "Dr Vermaakt signed the CPR as a Registered Professional Scientist, which is a statutory scientifics body and is thus obliged to conform to their code of practise, ethics and disciplinary procedures. Any person or organisation has the right to lodge a complaint against a person who has signed a report Pr.Sci. Nat.," Van Wyk said.
Secondly, he pointed out that Mineweb had erroneously made statements on behalf of the GSSA in its first report (20 November). At the time, GSSA had not issued a complaint: "The Mineweb article was not sanctioned by the GSSA and I request that Mineweb please retract any previous statements on behalf of the GSSA," he said.
Vermaakt said in a statement issued by Bullion Resources to the London Stock Exchange yesterday that he had not been notified by the Geological Society, SAMREC or SACNAS that any complaint had been lodged. "Furthermore, he reconfirms the contents of his report and intends to defend its contents should such alleged complaint be formally brought to his attention," Bullion Resources said in its statement. It added that it was unaware of the basis of a complaint and could therefore not comment upon it.
The company added that gold had been produced from two of its resources, Drylands and Machavie, contrary to a Mineweb report which stated the prospects had been in a number of hands without ever being developed.
Van den Bergh, managing director of Bullion Resources, said earlier that the company's entrepreneurial approach would make its resources economic. The depreciation of the rand and improved gold market would be other contriburing factors, he said. Bullion Resources has bought plant at heavily discounted prices such that cash flow pressure on the projects would be lessened
= = = = = = = = =
BLO's Website: http://picture-it.co.za/bullionresources/|
Bullion Res share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange