Kibo Energy Share Discussion Threads

[mikemike16] 23/12/2018 02:13

''Mike - I've been retired for some time. The 'industry' did rely on my research for many years before that and two years ago my latest 'research' had the best track record of any. But it was only available to professionals. So kind of you not to think of that.''

So you claim, now back it up and prove it, or are you going to retire from all Bb as well

[guitars4stars] 22/12/2018 18:36

#Arrogance

[lurker5] 22/12/2018 15:28

Oh ! and Mr Twangs Lad. Can I try to insert into your noddle a very very simple point. In the absence of any reputable research into Kibo, and in the face of posts by your mates, especially 'over there', which make totally absurd and illogical assertions about Kibo's 'value, and which have in every case proved woefully wrong, I will continue to post my own projections and opinions.

And it would be so kind of you to explain to all of us why it is that you term posts as 'arrogant', which set out in order to be helpful the sorts of meticulous projections produced for over 40 years for fund managers in respect of the most complicated shares and which have proved accurate. Whereas you do not term as 'arrogant', the posts of your mates, who obviously have no experience in shares, and certainly no professional qualifications, and whose 'predictions' about various Kibo value elements (Katoro, the Sepco back payment, etc etc) have been so adrift from reality, the fact that they continually delete posts that counter their own beliefs.

I look forward to your explanation, which will tell us how 'logic' works (or doesn't) in your brain.

So Kind !

[guitars4stars] 22/12/2018 15:07

Sheer arrogance is your thing. Enjoy it into well into the New Year & watch friends one by one disappear...

[lurker5] 22/12/2018 15:01

Mike - I've been retired for some time. The 'industry' did rely on my research for many years before that and two years ago my latest 'research' had the best track record of any. But it was only available to professionals. So kind of you not to think of that.

[mikemike16] 22/12/2018 14:09

Lurker, if you were that good then industry publications would want to have you write technical columns for them. That they do not, says it all.

I have been told to lay off the mince pies and sherry. I think you should too!!

[lurker5] 22/12/2018 13:45

Mr Strings. I post for those who want to know how their shares will perform and who can read and understand simple technical reports. I've been right for Kibosh all the way down from its 9p spike. I'm not surprised you can't learn the lesson however - your lack of grasp has shown through in all your posts. Go back to twanging strings.

[guitars4stars] 22/12/2018 12:24

Lurker... don't posture yourself into a zone that through sheer declared arrogance your narcissistic self believes anyone would care whatever you write?Merry Christmas....

[lurker5] 22/12/2018 11:57

Mike. The LSE nursery always deletes any post with sensible research. And few of its children dare to read the detailed research I post on this 'other place'. Its for the intelligent and those who want to be honest with themselves. So its a question of spraying around like insecticide in the hope a few drops will fall on a few intellectual insects.

[catchingmice] 22/12/2018 11:55

Posts: 20,784?Opinion:No OpinionPrice:1.65StrongToday 10:26Welcome let's hope your arrival signals a significant upturn in fortunes no pressure lol. Yup just one of these or even better running simultaneously or close ish will blast us past 11 p mcap of 100 m should child's play and then it's how we much can we multiply from thereYou can't be serious 11p When & how will it increase around 700% from this point ?' I see yous started on the Christmas drink already geezer and drank more than you can handle '

[mikemike16] 22/12/2018 02:05

Lurker so desperate you are spamming as manyboards as possible

I thought the most apt board was the one you created for ''Bogus''Certainly fits for sure.

As for not seeing the ''wood for the trees'' the usual suspects are still lost in the cold damp copse whist I am sunning myself on the wooden furniture.

Try to remember to have a season of goodwill

[uknighted] 21/12/2018 22:48

A comment on LSE today with which I concur:
Those that aren't invested and post on here must be I repeat must be losers with no life...period. I hope they respond to this and admit it.

[catchingmice] 21/12/2018 15:58

nPosts: 20,781?Opinion:No OpinionPrice:1.65300k buyToday 15:3210 p finish anyone -- ah wont be long before were saying thatMrprtI think everyone will run when it's 5p geezer and there won't be any shareholders left after that's hit

[murph1969] 21/12/2018 15:22

Thanks L5,

[electrick] 21/12/2018 15:05

Hello.
Just checking in to the madhouse to see how you are all getting in

Been a long time since end of March 2017. Just before the investor show and everyone was feeling excited about what great news was landing.

I have to admit through 2017 my concern was cash and inevitable funding problems. Never would I have thought the delays would run, and run and run.

So here you all are with KIBo at the end of 2018. Surely 2019 would be so disappointing.

Well good luck to you all. Hopefully retirement age won’t come before KIBO starts to show you a return

[aimchimp] 21/12/2018 14:43

Who called it right UKN? How much are you under water? What price is the next placing? Who is the cornerstone investor? Come on don't be shy, idiot.

[lurker5] 21/12/2018 14:15

Murph - Because I'v followed Kibo from the very beginning, and take an interest in bad management, bad research, CEO's who don't inform their shareholders, and the prevalence of General and his sibling Utter when they seek to control information.

[uknighted] 21/12/2018 12:40

AIMChimp not only bad grammar but now crude language also. It says everything about you we need to know.

[lurker5] 21/12/2018 11:20

Another Bogus Broker 'target'

Some cautionary reading over Xmas for the clappies - not that they'll be able to understand it.

And they seem unable to work out why -when the interims (and the FE note) showed clearly that Kibo is fast running out of cash - FE has suddenly produced a 'research note' whose 'target' share price is grotesquely exaggerated. (Not that they'd notice that either) And in the face of the obvious cash raise coming, some of them are, unbelievably, still buying !

But for the intelligent who want to know why their shares are tanking here's the reason

Not noted up to now as any sort of research house, FE's Nov 28 note piles three major mistakes one upon another. They are almost the same as made by Doh!fort - only worse.

(only a coincidence of course that the analyst was at Doh!fort when it collapsed ?)


Big Mistake 1) Kibo's project NPV's 2.4 times too high.

FE makes its own 'estimates' from projecting its 'estimated' profits (plucked out of the air - no workings or evidence to show where it got them from) forward by 25 years, to arrive at a $1,900m NPV at a 10% discount rate for all three projects - 2.4 times higher than has already been published by Kibo's project consultants and much higher than assumed even by Doh!fort

In Jan 2017 the IBFS for MCPP gave the irrs for the overall project, and also for the equity assuming a 25%/75% equity/loans split. While up-to-date capex was not given, using an informed estimate based on previous announcements ($650m including Kibo's mine and feasibliity costs) that is all that is necessary to reconstruct to reasonable accuracy the 25 year financial 'model' used by the consultants which will have produced the irr's announced, and will be the basis for tariff negotiations and Financial Close,

This shows the MCPP project 10% NPV to be around $280m. We don't have up-to-date figures (courtesy, as usual, LC) but the results aren't likely to be very different because these CtP projects' economics all turn out much the same.

Kibo in Dec 2014 also published results for MCPP's power only pre-feasibility study by Aurecon, showing a range of NPV between $230m - $280m on capex of $640-$780m. Irr's for project and equity were in line with the Jan 2017 IBFS.

So we can take around $280m as the definitive NPV, because it is what has been calculated by the professional consultants.

NPV's for Mabesekwa and Benga will be smaller - Kibo with only 85% of the former, and the latter having no captive coal mine.

For the three projects therefore, the 10% NPV acc to professional consultants with access to all the project details, income, and costs, is unlikely to exceed $750m.

For Mast Energy, FE assumes just one project (although five are needed to plug Kibo's cash drain) which the Aug RNS quoted as having NPV's of £16-£19m each for a 20MW plant, and irrs of 13-16% - from which can be deduced capex for each plant (not mentioned by LC) of at least £10m (confirmed by details from UK Power Reserve figures on Companies House).The figures also imply Kibo's 60% profit share from each plant after tax would be less than £0.8m.

Thus the total NPV's acc to Kibo's own consultants will be less than $800m. FE arrives at $1,900m !


Big Mistake 2) Kibo's project shares, nearly three times too high.

FE assumes that Kibo will have 80% of the projects' 'added value' ("which equates to a conservative 1.5* Developer Premium !")

FE doesn't give any reasoning for its extraordinary assertion, which seems to have been chosen to give -surprise surprise - the same 'headline' result as did Doh!fort even though Kibo's whole make-up has changed.

Apart from that, 'added value' is just an alternative term for an NPV, while 'development premiums' only exist for property construction which (usually) can be sold on completion at a profit. But power plants are built down to a price and a tariff, so that nowhere on the internet and among power conglomerates like AES Group can be found any power project which has been sold off at a profit on completion and could therefore have delivered its builders a 'development premium'.

Apart from that, to assume Kibo has 80% of the NPV when at the most it will have spent (on a coal mine and feasibility) no more than 25% of the equity capex, while the major funders (like GE and Sepco ?) will put up 75% - would make the finances impossible for the latter. Nowhere can be found an example where the share of a project cash flows is not the same as the share of capital contributions - whether from past spending or not.

See Oracle Power's Dec 20 announcement that it will have 12.2% of its Thar CtP project equity, with its historical spend contributing part of the 12.2%. This is the usual arrangement for such projects, and FE's assumption for Kibo is pure baloney. See Oracle's full announcement and you will understand Kibo's problem that LC has never made clear to his shareholders.

So FE's exaggeration so far is 3 x 2.4 = 7.2 times the reality.


Big Mistake 3) Kibo shares in issue when projects start to contribute almost certainly only half the reality

Optimistically, the earliest any of Kibo's projects might start to generate revenue and, after running smoothly start to pay Kibo a dividend, is at least five years time, or 2023/24 at the earliest.

FE assumes Kibo will issue no more shares at all over that five years, beyond 100m to Sepco (at 1.9p) - bringing the total now (and in 2024) to 730m.

But Benga and Mabeseweka haven't got beyond their preliminary feasiblities. Full, detailed, bankable feasibility studies required by lenders and equity funders cost at least the $11m spent at MCPP each (maybe a bit less for experience gained, but not that much less), while if Kibo wants a bigger share than it will earn by funding feasibility, it is going to have to issue more shares to pay for it. (See Oracle above)

On top of that is the £2-3m annually Kibo needs to keep the lights on (and pay the directors) quite apart from what it will be called on to keep its share of Katoro once it raises the funds to start any mine.

The five 20MW Mast plants needed to plug Kibo's cash drain will cost £50m plus. Some might be borrowed (which will take away some of the £0.8m per plant they would contribute to Kibo) but one way or another Mast is going to cost Kibo at least £10-£15m before it provides any help.

So we have probably well over £20m to be raised by Kibo before its projects can start contributing in five years time, compared with its market cap now of only £13m.

No wonder Sepco is hesitating.

Which means shares in issue will likely be twice the 730m assumed by FE in its 'target price'. Possibly more.

Scale of exaggeration so far ! 2.4 x 3 x 2 = 14.4 times !


and that's without the basic fact that


Big Mistake 4) NPV based 'targets' are never, ever approached in practice in the market.

The reasons are

a) what discount rate to use ? A NPV10% is 25% less than at 8%. A broker analyst paid to puff a share can take his pick ! A 12% discount rate (half the NPV at 8%) usually predicts share prices much more accurately.

b) A NPV isn't a logical price to pay. A NPV is merely the total of all discounted future returns, so anyone paying it is paying up-front for 25 year of returns. If all goes to plan (which it never does) he would merely get his money back plus a 10% annual return. What fool would buy that ?

My own research over 70 AIM miners in 2008-12, as does Edison recently, could not find any miner, even with funding arranged, at more than 1/3rd of its 'target' NPV based price.

So why is FE peddling this 'incentive' to buy Kibo shares ?

(Clue: even FE's forecast end 2018 Kibo balance sheet shows net cash of £0.3m - but only assuming it has received £1.9m from Sepco !)

You work it out.

I'll post a more correct, professional, calculation later.

[lurker5] 21/12/2018 11:20

Another Bogus Broker 'target'

Some cautionary reading over Xmas for the clappies - not that they'll be able to understand it.

And they seem unable to work out why -when the interims (and the FE note) showed clearly that Kibo is fast running out of cash - FE has suddenly produced a 'research note' whose 'target' share price is grotesquely exaggerated. (Not that they'd notice that either) And in the face of the obvious cash raise coming, some of them are, unbelievably, still buying !

But for the intelligent who want to know why their shares are tanking here's the reason

Not noted up to now as any sort of research house, FE's Nov 28 note piles three major mistakes one upon another. They are almost the same as made by Doh!fort - only worse.

(only a coincidence of course that the analyst was at Doh!fort when it collapsed ?)


Big Mistake 1) Kibo's project NPV's 2.4 times too high.

FE makes its own 'estimates' from projecting its 'estimated' profits (plucked out of the air - no workings or evidence to show where it got them from) forward by 25 years, to arrive at a $1,900m NPV at a 10% discount rate for all three projects - 2.4 times higher than has already been published by Kibo's project consultants and much higher than assumed even by Doh!fort

In Jan 2017 the IBFS for MCPP gave the irrs for the overall project, and also for the equity assuming a 25%/75% equity/loans split. While up-to-date capex was not given, using an informed estimate based on previous announcements ($650m including Kibo's mine and feasibliity costs) that is all that is necessary to reconstruct to reasonable accuracy the 25 year financial 'model' used by the consultants which will have produced the irr's announced, and will be the basis for tariff negotiations and Financial Close,

This shows the MCPP project 10% NPV to be around $280m. We don't have up-to-date figures (courtesy, as usual, LC) but the results aren't likely to be very different because these CtP projects' economics all turn out much the same.

Kibo in Dec 2014 also published results for MCPP's power only pre-feasibility study by Aurecon, showing a range of NPV between $230m - $280m on capex of $640-$780m. Irr's for project and equity were in line with the Jan 2017 IBFS.

So we can take around $280m as the definitive NPV, because it is what has been calculated by the professional consultants.

NPV's for Mabesekwa and Benga will be smaller - Kibo with only 85% of the former, and the latter having no captive coal mine.

For the three projects therefore, the 10% NPV acc to professional consultants with access to all the project details, income, and costs, is unlikely to exceed $750m.

For Mast Energy, FE assumes just one project (although five are needed to plug Kibo's cash drain) which the Aug RNS quoted as having NPV's of £16-£19m each for a 20MW plant, and irrs of 13-16% - from which can be deduced capex for each plant (not mentioned by LC) of at least £10m (confirmed by details from UK Power Reserve figures on Companies House).The figures also imply Kibo's 60% profit share from each plant after tax would be less than £0.8m.

Thus the total NPV's acc to Kibo's own consultants will be less than $800m. FE arrives at $1,900m !


Big Mistake 2) Kibo's project shares, nearly three times too high.

FE assumes that Kibo will have 80% of the projects' 'added value' ("which equates to a conservative 1.5* Developer Premium !")

FE doesn't give any reasoning for its extraordinary assertion, which seems to have been chosen to give -surprise surprise - the same 'headline' result as did Doh!fort even though Kibo's whole make-up has changed.

Apart from that, 'added value' is just an alternative term for an NPV, while 'development premiums' only exist for property construction which (usually) can be sold on completion at a profit. But power plants are built down to a price and a tariff, so that nowhere on the internet and among power conglomerates like AES Group can be found any power project which has been sold off at a profit on completion and could therefore have delivered its builders a 'development premium'.

Apart from that, to assume Kibo has 80% of the NPV when at the most it will have spent (on a coal mine and feasibility) no more than 25% of the equity capex, while the major funders (like GE and Sepco ?) will put up 75% - would make the finances impossible for the latter. Nowhere can be found an example where the share of a project cash flows is not the same as the share of capital contributions - whether from past spending or not.

See Oracle Power's Dec 20 announcement that it will have 12.2% of its Thar CtP project equity, with its historical spend contributing part of the 12.2%. This is the usual arrangement for such projects, and FE's assumption for Kibo is pure baloney. See Oracle's full announcement and you will understand Kibo's problem that LC has never made clear to his shareholders.

So FE's exaggeration so far is 3 x 2.4 = 7.2 times the reality.


Big Mistake 3) Kibo shares in issue when projects start to contribute almost certainly only half the reality

Optimistically, the earliest any of Kibo's projects might start to generate revenue and, after running smoothly start to pay Kibo a dividend, is at least five years time, or 2023/24 at the earliest.

FE assumes Kibo will issue no more shares at all over that five years, beyond 100m to Sepco (at 1.9p) - bringing the total now (and in 2024) to 730m.

But Benga and Mabeseweka haven't got beyond their preliminary feasiblities. Full, detailed, bankable feasibility studies required by lenders and equity funders cost at least the $11m spent at MCPP each (maybe a bit less for experience gained, but not that much less), while if Kibo wants a bigger share than it will earn by funding feasibility, it is going to have to issue more shares to pay for it. (See Oracle above)

On top of that is the £2-3m annually Kibo needs to keep the lights on (and pay the directors) quite apart from what it will be called on to keep its share of Katoro once it raises the funds to start any mine.

The five 20MW Mast plants needed to plug Kibo's cash drain will cost £50m plus. Some might be borrowed (which will take away some of the £0.8m per plant they would contribute to Kibo) but one way or another Mast is going to cost Kibo at least £10-£15m before it provides any help.

So we have probably well over £20m to be raised by Kibo before its projects can start contributing in five years time, compared with its market cap now of only £13m.

No wonder Sepco is hesitating.

Which means shares in issue will likely be twice the 730m assumed by FE in its 'target price'. Possibly more.

Scale of exaggeration so far ! 2.4 x 3 x 2 = 14.4 times !


and that's without the basic fact that


Big Mistake 4) NPV based 'targets' are never, ever approached in practice in the market.

The reasons are

a) what discount rate to use ? A NPV10% is 25% less than at 8%. A broker analyst paid to puff a share can take his pick ! A 12% discount rate (half the NPV at 8%) usually predicts share prices much more accurately.

b) A NPV isn't a logical price to pay. A NPV is merely the total of all discounted future returns, so anyone paying it is paying up-front for 25 year of returns. If all goes to plan (which it never does) he would merely get his money back plus a 10% annual return. What fool would buy that ?

My own research over 70 AIM miners in 2008-12, as does Edison recently, could not find any miner, even with funding arranged, at more than 1/3rd of its 'target' NPV based price.

So why is FE peddling this 'incentive' to buy Kibo shares ?

(Clue: even FE's forecast end 2018 Kibo balance sheet shows net cash of £0.3m - but only assuming it has received £1.9m from Sepco !)

You work it out.

I'll post a more correct, professional, calculation later.