Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
North River LSE:NRRP London Ordinary Share GB00BDDRJJ03 ORD 0.2P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p +0.00% 2.75p 0.00p 0.00p - - - 0 05:00:10
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Mining 0.0 -9.8 -0.5 - 0.73

North River (NRRP) Latest News

More North River News
North River Takeover Rumours

North River (NRRP) Share Charts

1 Year North River Chart

1 Year North River Chart

1 Month North River Chart

1 Month North River Chart

Intraday North River Chart

Intraday North River Chart

North River (NRRP) Discussions and Chat

North River Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
31/3/201723:55North River Resources Lead Silver and Zinc3,403.00
06/6/201413:10Berg Aukas pre feaso as a comparison18.00
05/3/201411:01North River Resources: Lead Silver and Zinc2.00
02/2/201419:38North River Resources - Heading North 2010900.00
18/12/201313:06Undervalued Turnaround Stock 20132.00

Add a New Thread

North River (NRRP) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all North River trades in real-time

North River (NRRP) Top Chat Posts

crunch123: When Martin French left back in January 2014 the NRRP share price (adjusted for the July 2016 1/250 share consolidation) at the close of that day was £1.25 It's now 9 pence. I'm obviously aware that the company is an innocent victim of timing and Namibian politics . . . but . . . it was clearly stated in the March 2015 conference call that they were working on a new investor relations strategy. There has been one RNS in the last 4.5 months and their commitment to hold quarterly shareholder conference calls has proved risible. Can't say that impressed with their investor relations strategy. Under Martin's leadership shareholders also had the advantage of being kept well informed about what was happening. Probably a forlorn hope but could we have Martin back please?
steve239: Good summary, YT. To add to that: The licence award (which is clearly a race against time, to avoid diluting shareholders out of existence) and the subsequent funding options are obviously the two key issues. The market currently values the entire company at about £2 million. Funding to reach production will require around £20-25 million. Based on current metal prices and currency exchange rates, the company should then be making at the very least £20 million (NOT Dollars) of clear profit PER YEAR. We need to be updated on resources and reserves at some stage but we know (from 2 years ago) that the actual reserves were equivalent to a mine life of 3.5 years and the resources that needed infill drilling (assuming that was achievable) to convert them to reserves, would take the total mine life up to 5 years. On top of that we have whatever resources/reserves they have come up with from drilling operations carried out during the last 2 years. During that period, some seriously high grade materials have been reported in RNS announcements so it will be interesting to see how the resource figures develop. On the funding aspect, the project obviously couldn’t be funded by raising equity at the current share price but on announcement of a licence the share price ought to be at least 0.20p in pre-consolidation terms, ie 50p in “current money”. Although that is several times the current (ridiculously low) valuation, it needs to be put into context. In “old money”, over the years the share price of the company has fallen from around 12p to the current 0.03p (a 400-fold drop) so roughly a 6-fold increase (in going from last chance saloon to the very real prospect of a producing, profit making mine) really should not be too much to ask. At a share price of 0.20p (old money) / 50p (new money) the total number of shares would roughly need to double in order to fund 50% of the project costs through share-based equity. With the company and Greenstone’s knowledge and connections, they ought to be able to fund at least 50% by other means such as loans or off-take deals, based on the favourable project economics and the unusually short pay-back time.
yellowthroat: If the movement on NEEEF 25% is speeded up or at least reaches conclusion in a reasonable timescale. The licence award and acceptance of the conditions would make this one of the AIM turnaround stocks of the year in my view. Obviously there are some big Ifs, but I am thinking of anyone who is NEW looking into the trials and tribulations of this company and also looking at the upturn in fortunes for ZINC. This is well worth sticking on the watch list. New observers I can tell you no-one is putting anymore money in at the moment of those people that are just about shot of confidence of this apparent Turkey. However as I say for those newer non widows and orphans looking to play AIM. 1. Large investor picked this company first out of 300 possibles. 2. Poor Share Price is down to non awardence of licence on political issues. 3. Namibia have not said they will not award it but they are introducing NEEEF. 4. As Steve says the excellent ROR is based on ZINC $2400 it is over $2500. 5. As ZINC observers will know it is predicted to be THE metal 2017-2022. 6. There is more resource predicted throughout life of mine. LEAD ZINC SILVER --------- Negatives are the amount of shares in the hands of Greenstone and the current share price which impinges in the short term on financing. The lack of a licence so far as political risk impacts with the current government deciding to take a kind of socialist, take a percentage from the private sector, type approach to FDI. We have just heard rumours from the govt that they are getting it at the Namibian investment conference and that excessive demands could be reined in ! Therefore it is looking more likely that conditions can be met so that the licence proposal can be accepted and we can get on with building what would on the surface being a very profitable mine ! Licence award should see a rapid increase here of this VERY low price ? DYOR Regards YT
steve239: Four weeks ago Rod Beddows stated during the conference call that if the resolution was passed, he would be purchasing shares in the company, demonstrating his belief in the future of the project. I can’t see any evidence of recent director purchases, so what has changed? Is he waiting for the share price to fall further, as the other directors did before buying last year? The share price of the most recent sales today was equivalent to 0.045p in “old money.” Like many others I paid, on average, between 15 and 20 times that much per share and can’t understand for the life of me why the selling still outweighs the buying at this price, with people prepared to virtually give away their shares in the hope of re-investing their remaining £2.50 elsewhere. Despite the never-ending delays, it has to be an odds-on shot that this project will eventually take off before it’s too late and that the share price will at some future stage be several multiples of the current level. Maybe I’m a born gambler but if I had been watching on the sidelines for the last year or two without already investing much of my life savings here, I would be buying a sackful at these prices, as the likely upside is so much bigger than the downside. It would be helpful if the directors would show a bit of support by opening their wallets and letting the market know that they had done so. As for the licensing process, the failure of the ministry to formally respond within the stated timeframe is “a tad disappointing” (huge understatement) but we do at least know from the recent dial-in that James Beams is having confidential ongoing discussions with the ministry. So the delay is frustrating but doesn’t necessarily imply a Mexican standoff. Come on, chaps. We’ve already spent at least £10 million on exploration that has cost you nothing. Give us a mining licence and we’ll construct a mine at no cost to you, employ a few hundred Namibian citizens and pay you 30-40% tax on our profits. Surely you can’t ask for more than that (???)
steve239: You have to laugh at the (copyrighted) article, dated July 19, 2016 on, in which the author seems blissfully unaware of the recent share consolidation. He states that the NRRP share price has reached an all-time high, that trading stocks at all-time highs is often a winning strategy, and that the company’s market cap is now 429.37 million GBP. If only...
yellowthroat: 28 June 2016 North River Resources plc ("North River" or the "Company") US$5.6 million Fundraising, Share Capital Reorganisation & Notice of General Meeting North River Resources plc announces that a circular including a Notice of General Meeting has today been posted to Shareholders (the "Circular"). The General Meeting is to be held at the offices of Shakespeare Martineau LLP, 6th Floor, Allianz House, 60 Gracechurch Street, London, EC3V 0HR on 18 July 2016 at 2.00 p.m. (London time) . A copy of the circular and Notice of General Meeting will also be available to view on the Company's website The definitions that apply throughout this announcement can be found at the end of this announcement. PART 1: LETTER FROM THE INDEPENT NON-EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN Dear Shareholders Share Capital Reorganisation Financing Proposals for Open Offer and Placing of up to 12,317,359 Open Offer Shares and Placing Shares at 23.75 pence per share Grant of conversion rights in respect of Loan Notes Waiver of Rule 9 of the Code Authorisation to issue Equity Securities and Notice of General Meeting 1. Introduction The Company announces today that it has raised conditionally $5.6 million through the issue of new secured, conditionally convertible loan notes (the "Loan Notes") to Greenstone Resources LP, further details of which are set out in paragraph 5 of this Part I. The funds raised will be used, in conjunction with the Company's existing cash resources, to repay the 2015 Convertible Loan Notes issued to Greenstone in 2015 pursuant to the terms of the 2015 Convertible Loan Note Instrument and 2015 Investment Agreement and to provide working capital for, inter alia, the Company's short term Work Programme and ongoing planning for commencing outstanding pre-construction work streams. The Company also announces today Financing Proposals to issue new shares in the Company to enable it to redeem the Loan Notes in full, subject to Shareholder approval. The Company proposes to redeem the Loan Notes as to 30 per cent. through conversion of such Loan Notes into New Greenstone Shares and as to 70 per cent. from the proceeds of an open offer to all Eligible Shareholders (other than Greenstone) (the "Open Offer") and a placing of Placing Shares with existing and new shareholders (the "Placing"). To the extent that the Open Offer and the Placing do not raise sufficient funds to repay 70 per cent. of the Loan Notes not already converted or repaid, it is proposed that the remaining Loan Notes will also be converted in to New Greenstone Shares at the Conversion Price. On completion of these Financing Proposals, the Company will have net additional working capital of approximately US$2.5 million (before expenses). The Board believes the Namib Project continues to be the best option to create value for all Shareholders. Subject to approval of all Resolutions, the Company will be substantially debt free and fully funded to meet its Phase One Funding Requirement as set out below. On completion of the Financing Proposals, if approved by Shareholders, Greenstone will be interested in a minimum of 29.997 per cent. of the Enlarged Share Capital and a maximum of 76.67 per cent. of the Enlarged Share Capital. Ordinarily, the acquisition of an interest in 30 per cent. or more of the voting rights in the Company's shares would require Greenstone to make a mandatory bid under Rule 9 of the Code. Accordingly, the Board is seeking, inter alia, the approval of the Shareholders other than Greenstone (the "Independent Shareholders") of a waiver by the Panel of Rule 9 of the Code (the "Waiver") which the Panel has agreed with the Company to grant, subject to the passing of the ordinary resolution proposed as Resolution 4 (as set out in the attached notice of general meeting) (the "Whitewash Resolution") by the Independent Shareholders at a general meeting of the Company, of any obligation on the part of Greenstone, to make a general offer to Shareholders under Rule 9 of the Code which otherwise might arise upon any conversion of the Loan Notes. Greenstone's subscription for $5.6 million of Loan Notes provides the Company with certainty of funding from today, without which it would need to commence drastic measures to reduce spending and more than likely enter into an insolvency process, which would almost certainly lead to the loss of control over the Company's principal asset, being the Namib Project. The Loan Notes subscription and the Financing Proposals are the only terms on which Greenstone is willing to finance the Company at this stage and, whether or not the elements of the Financing Proposals which are subject to Shareholder approval (the subject of this document) are approved, the Loan Notes subscription and the Financing Proposals secure the Company's immediate financial position and provide a structure in which all Shareholders are able to participate and to retain an interest in the Company. As the proposed Issue Price of the Open Offer and the Placing (being equivalent to 0.095 pence on a pre Share Capital Reorganisation basis) is below the nominal value of the Existing Ordinary Shares (being 0.2 pence per Existing Ordinary Share) which would not be permitted under the Companies Act, the Company intends, subject to Shareholder approval, to re-organise its share capital to enable the Financing Proposals to proceed. Shareholder approval is therefore also being sought for a sub-division, re-designation and consolidation of the Existing Ordinary Shares in order to permit the Company to raise capital through the issue of additional equity (the "Share Capital Reorganisation"). The Share Capital Reorganisation will also have the effect of reducing the number of ordinary shares in issue. The Directors believe that this will result in a market share price that will be at a more appropriate level for the Company as well as reducing the share price volatility. The Company is therefore convening a general meeting, to be held at the offices of Shakespeare Martineau LLP, 6th Floor, Allianz House, 60 Gracechurch Street, London, EC3V 0HR at 2.00 p.m. on 18 July 2016, to approve the necessary resolutions to allow the Financing Proposals to proceed (the "General Meeting"). Further details of the General Meeting and Resolutions to be put forward thereat are set out in the Circular. Shareholders should note that, if any of the Resolutions set out in the notice of General Meeting of the Company dated 28 June 2016 are not passed, none of the Financing Proposals will proceed. In that event, absent any other fundraising by the Company, it is highly likely that the Company would be unable to repay the Loan Notes before the final Maturity Date and would therefore be in default of the terms of the Loan Notes. In such circumstances, Greenstone would not be able to convert the Loan Notes into New Greenstone Shares but would have the right to enforce the Security over the Group's principal asset, NLZM, the operating subsidiary which owns and operates the Namib Project. Greenstone has indicated that, in the event of such a default, it would be its intention to exercise its rights in relation to the Security. This would leave the Group in a highly uncertain financial position and in all likelihood it would result in the Group companies ceasing to trade, insolvency and, ultimately, the liquidation of the Group resulting in Shareholders losing their investment in the Company. The Independent Directors, having considered the likely alternative sources of capital, believe that it is highly unlikely that alternative funding could be secured either now or, in the event that Shareholders do not approve the Resolutions, before the final Maturity Date. The Company, having exhausted all other potential avenues for new financing, has, to date, not identified new sources of financing, in what continues to be a challenging market environment for pre-construction mining projects such as the Namib Project. As such, it is critical that Shareholders vote in favour of the Resolutions at the General Meeting so that the Financing Proposals can proceed and the Group can continue trading.
steve239: I haven’t posted since November as there doesn’t seem to be much left to say. I’m still fully invested here and, despite averaging down several times, my holding is now worth less than 10% of the amount I paid for it. At this stage there seems to be little point in selling out and risking the ultimate regret of helplessly watching a major turn around in fortunes while uninvested. Clearly the actual prices of zinc/lead/silver in mid-2017, as well as the 12-month forward price projections in mid-2016, are crucial, as is the award of a mining licence. The other critical factor is the relationship between Greenstone and the remainder of NRRP. If Greenstone wants the company as a whole to succeed, then there are ways and means of achieving this. If, on the other hand, Greenstone is merely intent on taking as much of the company as possible as cheaply as possible, while piggy-backing its way to a mining licence, then the future is bleak for all other shareholders. Personally I am still torn between two different explanations of the disastrous collapse of the share price, one of which invokes a mixture of hope and despair, and the other just anger and resentment. Theory 1 is that the company has been largely a victim of circumstance, with regard to the collapse of the AIM resources sector as a whole and the reluctance of Namibia to award any mining licences. Even if this is the case, the company has clearly made numerous poor decisions (to some extent dictated by Greenstone) and, despite supposedly holding endless talks with the Ministry, James Beams is obviously not on their wavelength, as he has implied more than once that he thought the licence award was not far away. Theory 2 is simply based on the kind of institutional thuggery that has been witnessed so many times on AIM. If Greenstone’s objective all along has been to acquire the company (or at least the majority of it) as cheaply as possible, with total disregard for the existing shareholders without whom Greenstone would never have had this opportunity, then obviously we have a problem. In my opinion the nature and scope of the next fund raise will go a long way towards providing an answer to the above. The question is, who appointed Dr Beddows and with what intentions? If he is working on behalf of the company as a whole, there are a number of viable options associated with a small cash raise. Alternatively if he has been brought in by Greenstone as the executioner, then we might see an outrageous manoeuvre, most likely a share consolidation, effectively taking the nominal share price to a fraction of its current level, and a big equity raise at somewhere around the current share price, with Greenstone taking all of the shares in the form of high-interest convertible loan notes and effectively killing off the remaining shareholders. Should this kind of transaction take place, I think the circumstances could warrant investigation by the FCA. Happy New Year!!
yellowthroat: Mack, hardly as we have just picked up £2.5mn in a recent placement and there is a lot of talk about how we could exist for X amount of time even from those that are very vigorous in their criticism of the company. Ironically all the talk was that we would be bought out at something around the purchase prices of Greenstone stock, so considering their average might be about 0.30pence say, then selling at 0.10pence because you might be bought out at 0.30pence is completely and utterly non-sensical. Administration is even more unlikely and if it did come, then it is more likely to be after six to twelve months at least, in which time that is all that period in which : 1. The licence is issued 2. Commodities improve 3. Phase Two is put into action and we get all the project funds 4. A larger partner comes in on EPL 2092 or as part of a new project 5. The company consolidates with a Greenstone or otherwise approved company 6. NR purchases a bombed out stock with licence and revenues Administration is not the reason to sell at the moment. Also we are still watching the share price day to day when clearly in the scheme of things the business related aspects take time. The licence in time terms is months so clearly we cannot legislate for it day to day. That doesn't mean it doesn't need to come now, but looking at the share price day to day and deciding to sell is as has been evident catastrophic for the share price and the MMs waiting to pounce on capitulation. As it happens now I find myself in a short term situation where I don't need to sell any at the moment, like Mack and therefore I am not trying to get the share price up in the short term to sell or whatever. Quite simply when and if good things do happen, I want there to be enough left in the share price that we CAN raise funds to provide for what we need to do. At the moment the voting down of Resolution 8 and then the current selling frenzy and bashing (whilst perhaps justified) has left the share price in a devastating position that is now apparently self-fulfilling. I have yet to find any definitive proof that the recent delays have been anything other than. 1. James Ken and Keith wanted to re-do the DFS and optimisation 2. This meant GS didn't have to pay 0.90pence, but not down to them 3. The licence hasn't been issued which is concurrent with other companies 4. A lot of people don't want in at the moment because commodities are in free-fall 5. Glencore have said that funds are selling all commodities for other reasons and mainly around oil and are running for cash against supply fundamentals. Some people are getting ahead of themselves with allegations that may or may not be correct. Yup this is in disarray now, it seems like all the points I have made over the last few months have been ignored. Okay fine but day to day selling ? We must think of this in terms of business milestones and not sell every day if something doesn't happen by next minute. We could even get details of the business review any day. O/T On other stocks I get bashed for being negative, on this stock I get bashed for being positive. LOL If I thought we were broke I would understand. PS : Yes I have said that the licence issue is diabolical and I am annoyed at all parties in this not being foreseen and forthcoming. Regards YT
steve239: Share consolidations sound like a good idea but in my experience they are a recipe for disaster on AIM. Every example I have seen on AIM has been followed by an immediate and sustained fall in the share price, even when the company’s valuation has not previously been in free-fall, as the price heads back towards its previous value. There is no logic whatsoever in this, it simply appears to be a psychological effect and an immediate fall seems to have become an expectation of the market, which makes it self-fulfilling as everyone rushes to sell first. When someone on another NRRP board recently mentioned a possible share consolidation I nearly wrote to the company to say “Please don’t do it.” But clearly it’s a waste of time contacting them. Months ago I told the company that we needed proper promotion and marketing (at very little cost) to maintain or increase the share price with an equity raise imminent; but they ignored me and the share price continued to fall. I told them we needed to increase the resource/reserve and therefore the NPV but they ignored me and the share price continued to fall. I told them the directors needed to show confidence in the company by investing themselves but they ignored me and the share price continued to fall. I told them they should use the influence of our Chinese connection to the gigantic Husab mine in Namibia to help us with the licence application but they ignored me and we continue to wait endlessly for the licence.
steve239: Briefly returning to the earlier discussion, not simply for the sake of argument, but because IMO it raises a few interesting points.. Firstly I don’t agree with the view that the intelligent, objective analysis on this board (as opposed to talking up our company) is one of the reasons for the lack of progress in the share price. In my view the kind of level-headed investor looking to buy in here would appreciate a community that tries to realistically assess the facts, rather than drawing people in with speculative future projections (not an accusation targeted at Discusser). In this respect I speak from experience, having lost a fortune in two AIM-listed companies where I was swept along with the wave of enthusiasm, buying more and more as the share price dropped, only to find when it was too late that neither company did “what it said on the tin.” Moving on to a related issue, it is not down to existing shareholders to try to draw in potential investors. That is solely the responsibility of the company’s IR/PR department, which needs to keep current and prospective investors updated with regular news flow, as well as spreading the word as far as possible through regular presentations and networking at industry events. Personally (and the same applies to a number of others on here) I think that I have done more than my share in trying to support the share price over the last 18 months and in recent times, adding yet another 2 million shares at under 0.5 pence while some were not prepared (or were unable) to hang around and sold out. This leads me on to a further point. Although we are clearly undervalued at this stage, awaiting a further injection of $5 million from Greenstone at 0.9p hopefully in the next 2-3 months, by direct comparison with the rest of the AIM-listed mining sector we haven’t done that badly. When the headless chicken (aka Steinpreis) stepped aside and trading was suspended, just over 2 years ago, the share price was almost exactly where it is now. Out of necessity for survival and development (as opposed to supporting an AIM-listed executive beneficiary scheme) we have had to treble the level of equity to reach the post-DFS, pre-production stage where we are now, so the market cap has trebled and the share price is exactly as it was then. Obviously we didn’t expect to tread water for 2 years, but during that time many (if not most) of the mining explorers on AIM have lost somewhere between 50% and 90% of their share price and you can be sure that the majority will never reach production. Analysis of our performance vs. other mining stocks provides both a testament to the supreme efforts of Martin French and a reminder (when told that we have done ourselves no favours by being so conservative on the BB) that despite our disappointment we have still outperformed the majority of the sector during the last couple of years and crucially are now in a position to reap the benefits (pending the mining licence award). Returning to the specific point about the share price in October 2016, my observation was not whether we will eventually achieve 3p (and maybe a lot more) but simply the timescale of events. Providing everything goes to plan and Greenstone’s intentions are aligned with ours, then I see the share price as an exponential growth curve over the coming years, where the hardest thing to identify is when the rapid and substantial growth in the share price will begin. The major factors that will determine this are clearly: 1) How quickly the company builds up its base of resources/reserves, particularly the wealth of ore that supposedly exists on or near the surface of EPLs 2902 and 5075. Other projects might enter the equation but at this early stage it’s primarily about Namib. It largely depends on whether the focus over the next 12-18 months is mainly on data gathering at the surface or an all-out attempt to recover a vast amount of material, which (as I think YT implied) could potentially double the overall resource/reserve and move the goalposts a yard or two in terms of the NPV. 2) Commodity price movements, especially zinc. 3) The AIM market. As Discusser mentioned, Mark Sawyer recently described the current mining sector as dysfunctional, reflecting little in terms of true value. Should the resource-doubling scenario become reality, in terms of NPV we could well be worth 3p or more in late 2016. Whether that is fully reflected in the share price very much depends on the sentiment in the mining sector and on AIM in particular, and also the kind of audience we get our message out to. The more sophisticated investor who understands economic feasibility, has a longer term outlook and is capable of mentally detaching the actual NPV-based valuation from the price of the final Greenstone investment tranche, might consider buying in at 2-3p whereas those currently looking for a quick buck will be long gone by that stage. The onus is firmly on this newly appointed group of directors to make big strides “on the ground”, increase the base of potential long term investors, and at the same time keep its current loyal investors content with regular positive news updates. Don’t let us down, chaps.
North River share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:30 V: D:20170425 18:32:17