We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lithic Metals (SEE LSE:AFNR) | LMY | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.00 | 0.00% | 2.375 | 01:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.375 |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 22/12/2009 14:24 by themoneymonster2 Yes weak markets but this market cap does not make any sense. When LMY announced they were taking over Amber for £9.5 million they were going to issue 285,426,846 shares to Amber representing 3.3p per share in AfNat. The share price 2 days before AfNat floats is 2p? The Amber shareholders need a near on 50% increase just to get their value back. Madness of AIM I guess. Wish I was buying mine at 2p. |
Posted at 21/12/2009 09:32 by rastapastamasta So Afnat COULD sell off the Amber share holdings to raise cash.Not sure if it would be considered taking advantage of market conditions though: Bannerman is down from $1.2 to $0.7 after announcing higher than expected mining costs. Extract is trading around $8 having been at $12 earlier this year. LMY has paid approx the value of Amber's shareholdings for the T/O. This means that all other projects have been thrown in for free. Could be a good bit of business, especially if Afnat can wait for share price of Bannerman and Extract to recover before selling. Will be interesting to see what price these start trading at on 23/12. rpm |
Posted at 30/11/2009 20:25 by themoneymonster2 No it means that more shares will be iisued as the RTO values Amber at £9.5 million and LMY is only worth £4 million odd. I think the deal values the shares at the closing price of LMY when the news was released and that was 3.38p.I think there will be 411 million shares in issue of Afnat? x by 3.38p = £13.5 million approx, or £9.5 million (amber) plus £4 million (lmy) Someone correct me if I am wrong. |
Posted at 16/10/2009 10:55 by themoneymonster2 from iiiLMY's neighbour in Zambia has just released this news... "The Directors of African Energy Resources Limited are pleased to announce that the Zambian Minister for Mines and Minerals Development has granted Large Scale Mining Licence 12634‐HQ‐ Looking at the maps on their websites, it seems that LMY's Mpande and Oryx prospects are adjacent to African Energy's Chirundu project... This could be good news for LMY, but I don't know if it has any relevance to LMY's merger and/or acquistion plans. |
Posted at 20/9/2009 15:14 by zangdook Inside Building 468That's the one. Might it be them? They could use LMY's cash to buy more of EXT/KAH/URU whatever, and when URU pays out the expected dividend on sale of EXT, the cash could be used to develop and add to LMY's projects. |
Posted at 13/9/2009 10:23 by fordtin Morning Lizzy,I started writing this yesterday, but was 'forced' to log off in a hurry to attend a beer festival, so apologies if it overlaps with Inside Building's post. (slightly hung over so can't be bothered to start again) As I see it, announcing that they are considering a 'merger' with a larger company clearly says they are willing to give control to the other party. In other words, they've put a 'for sale' sign up. Would it be better to give a 51% controlling interest to another low cap company with limited cash resources, or accept just 5% to 20% of an enlarged company with ample cash resources to develop the company's projects? In the case of a 'merger' with a company like Regent, shareholders would gain substantial upside potential from a high quality investment portfolio in addition to a healthy cash pile. Being new to LMY I've only glimpsed a few of the details, would there be any benefit to a merger involving their joint venture partner? I note that ZRL had a boardroom spring clean around the same time as Lithic. It could just be a coincidence, but Julian Ford was kicked off the board of LMY and shortly after he stood down as ZRL's Managing Director. Doc Johnson has also resigned from the board of both companies fairly recently. ZRL have just announced an "Interim Funding Agreement" involving the issue of a large number of convertible loan notes to "a number of sophisticated investors. " Could "a number of sophisticated investors." include some of the Dattels/Mellon/Stalk 'Interim' suggests another stage to the funding agreement, could that involve a merger plus additional capital raising? One thing which catches the eye almost straight away is that LMY have kicked out a bunch of mining & exploration guys and replaced them with a boardroom full of Lawyers. Coincidentally ZRL have also replaced a geo with a lawyer. As you say, Ms Erdem is probably laughing her stockings off. There does seem to have been a general assumption that a merger would be with another company associated with the Dattels/Mellon/Stalk p.s. it's interesting to note from her bio that Ms Erdem has a special interest in "Takeovers from the Bidder's Perspective, focusing on cross border Mergers and Acquisitions." |
Posted at 12/9/2009 17:57 by inside building Lizzie,If memory serves me well the following were mergers: Peter Hambro and Aricom 16:1 Aquarius and Ridge 2.75:1 So i do not think a merger has to be of two equal size companies. I guess it is based on the two companies believing that the combined entity better serves their shareholders and the shareholders of the company that is losing their identity/stock market position receiving replacement shares in the new entity. As i said if this was EML then LMY shareholders may be satisfied with a 9:2 or 4:1 offer. This would value LMY at £6.8m/5.4p per share or £7.6m/6.0p per share. Your not losing out as you get shares in EML which would then hopefully be rerated by the market so you end up getting an even higher price when this occurs. I would also add that a merger in my opinion will be based on the combined companies being able to develop the LMY assets. Still think it will be EML as Dattels/Mellons are significant shareholders. IB |
Posted at 11/9/2009 14:52 by inside building We now have two outstanding candidates for a merger:NWT and EML What do they both have in common? NWT-URU-Dattels/Mell EML-Dattels/Mellon They both have the links because of existing share ownership and previous relationships with Uramin. I actually believe that EML/LMY would be a good step with EML being quoted by Jim Mellon as he and Dattels "company". This is where they hold their biggest personal investments and where i expect then to start deriving value and creation of a metals company. NWT is fundamentally a uranium company with its significant stake in URU. Now we already know that NWT are backers/mates of Dattels and have already told Rio to sling their hook this year. So what about EML/LMY then NWT being swallowed up? I think consolidation of assets in smaller companies and prioritisation of cash spend will be good for shareholders. NWT/EML/LMY i believe will be worth considerably more together than apart. £30+£5+£11 = £60m not £46m I also believe that with about £6-8m cash and £60m of realisable investments (based on EXT price today) between them that they could start progressing some of these assets without future liquidation. IB |
Posted at 10/9/2009 18:45 by lizzie ii OK, there are not any common directorships according to :--: and :- However LMY, from its connections, is clearly in the Dattels camp, and with NWT having a holding of 32.2% ownership of Niger Uranium (lse:URU), I think that NWT would be of interest to LMY. Market cap of LMY is currently £5.05m, whilst that of NWT is C$20.181m, which is £11.216m, and LMY has said its possible merger partner is a bigger company. And as I said before, NWT, currently quoted only in Canada, might find a London quote of interest, leading to a somewhat higher share price. So if I am right in all this, and only time will tell, I expect LMY to make an agreed "takeover bid" for NWT, and for the deal to be described as a merger. Don't forget the excellent data on the spreadsheet :- |
Posted at 07/9/2009 14:47 by inside building My view is that EML is now at the level it will reach based on its direct holding in EXT/KAH.KAH at £1.90 = about 10.25p per EML share. It will always trade at a discount to this holding. So with EML at 8.62p then i believe the upside is greater in LMY which is now why i am a shareholder in LMY. EML with the LMY asset base and its £3m in cash is likely to be a very good company to be in. It can liquidate its KAH/EXT position to raise funds for development of the nickel and Uranium assets or it can develop the slag heaps. Just think that EML will develop towards being a Nickel miner and will have substantial cash/cash equivalents and the man Dattels in the background to be able to do it. How can all the LMY mining assets only be worth £2m? IB |
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
