We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Alkemy Capital Investments Plc | LSE:ALK | London | Ordinary Share | GB00BMD6C023 | ORD GBP0.02 |
Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
-2.50 | -1.67% | 147.50 | 145.00 | 150.00 | 150.00 | 147.50 | 150.00 | 51,417 | 09:47:39 |
Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Offices-holdng Companies,nec | 1,000 | -1.77M | -0.2010 | -7.34 | 13.22M |
Date | Subject | Author | Discuss |
---|---|---|---|
07/7/2015 08:14 | Agreed (though I think its £ not p /MWh). But H1 electricity output up 25% should outweigh the slight drop in price received for electricity. Debt has increased and presumably cost of production with new capacity. Have to wait for Sep before we know profit. MB - perhaps Cantor don't have their most experienced employee on this one. Or maybe they have other info that we don't? | m4rtinu | |
06/7/2015 22:42 | Edited on m4rtinu input There is the slight problem in that the price ALK is getting paid is dropping(at the moment)£52 this year as against £50 next year, but ALK will have increased its output by then to easily overcome the 4% drop in income this signifies! | dan de lion | |
06/7/2015 21:09 | So why has Cantor Fitzgerald reiterated a hold at 20p ? | marine boy | |
06/7/2015 08:17 | Sounds promising, as long as costs are kept under control, which I have no reason to believe they aren't. | m4rtinu | |
06/7/2015 07:39 | Positive update with ALK on a PER 6.8 for the current year. VSA agree & indicate, "Electricity output was reported at 106GWh, remaining 25% ahead YoY in Q2, as was previously reported for Q1. ALK typically generates more electricity in H2 but just assuming H1 output is repeated in H2, this is in-line with our current FY output forecast (216GWh). Assuming the 25% YoY increase in maintained in H2, FY output would be c13% ahead of our forecast" concluding "This is a positive update from ALK, which has the potential to come in ahead of our FY 2015 forecasts. However, we are maintaining our existing forecasts at this point, given the remaining unsold output and uncertainty over electricity prices. We maintain our BUY recommendation and target price of 43p." Regards, GHF | glasshalfull | |
06/7/2015 07:14 | Or maybe ALK's good news will filter through given the markets are doing better than expected. | rivaldo | |
06/7/2015 06:30 | Maybe not on this particular Monday? Fine RNS just a bad day for it. | folderboy | |
06/7/2015 06:29 | This sounds like a very good H1 trading update today: "Trading for the period ended 30 June 2015 has seen electricity output of circa 106GWh (H1 2014: 85GWh). Core generation revenue is expected to be circa £8.5m (H1 2014: £5.9m). These increases are a reflection of the full year impact of the Carron Energy sites bought in 2014 along with encouraging base load production from the portfolio of coal mine methane ("CMM") sites. Power response activity in short term operating reserve ("STOR") has seen progressive improvement since the start of the year. As at 30 June 2015, approximately 90% of the Group's expected 2015 base load output is contracted at an average price of £52/MWh (June 2014: £53/MWh). In addition, we have contracted 45% of the expected base load output for 2016 at £50/MWh. We have commenced the build phase of our 28th power plant, a base load CMM site at Markham Main in South Yorkshire, which is to start production in H2 2015. Commenting on the update, Chief Executive Officer, Neil O'Brien, said: "We are delighted with the 25% increase in output and greater than 40% increase in generation revenue, which is a reflection of successful delivery on the Alkane growth strategy. Supply margins have tightened in the UK power market over recent years and the Board believes that Alkane's flexible and cost effective operating model leaves it well placed to benefit from this industry trend."" | rivaldo | |
06/7/2015 06:29 | Some momentum for a move north? | audigger | |
28/6/2015 18:50 | Fair comment woolybanana & thanks for the link. The idealists vs the realists. Misinformation for private agenda is rife on AIM. From Interstellar trailer: "We're not meant to save the world, We're meant to leave it". ALK's CMM is considered green. | marine boy | |
28/6/2015 15:23 | Thank you, Marine Boy. The article above suggests that reasons to reject fracking are being found. That neither ALK nor EDK frack is not relevant, it is the perception of what they do which matters; the market will judge them on that, not reality. Given the ability of Greenpeace and others to muddy the waters, any oil or gas extraction will be tarred with the fracking brush, in their bid to forward the green agenda. IMHO | woolybanana | |
26/6/2015 21:52 | Really woolybanana. I'm so glad you're not my counsel. You seem to have misinterpreted the advice note. (quote)"5. I am unaware of any objective evidence that can gainsay the above conclusions. While a refusal which is not backed by substantial objective evidence cannot be described as unlawful, it nonetheless can readily be described as unreasonable in planning terms. If a refusal based on DM2 (or any other generalised policy) were to be issued, it is highly likely that the Applicant will appeal. In the absence of clear evidence to gainsay the views of the various consultees (noted above) and the Case Officer, there is a high risk that a costs penalty will be imposed upon the Council. There is a further point. If a DM2 refusal is issued, the Case Officer cannot give evidence at any appeal, ie his position would be impossible. Moreover, I anticipate that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to find a reputable independent planning consultant to defend LCC’s position. The reality, therefore, is that a Member or Members will have to give evidence" (unquote) i.e. For LCC to refuse could be indefensible. My interpretation is that if LCC refuse, it would certainly go to appeal and costs are likely to be awarded against the council in favour of the appellant. Furthermore, ALK don't frack & EDR don't frack. EDR's share price is based on its conventional resources & potential Wressle discovery. | marine boy | |
26/6/2015 18:14 | It seems that Landashire County Council have refused Quadrilla the right to frack; I wonder how this will affect Alkane indirectly or directly. | woolybanana | |
26/6/2015 16:44 | At one stage today you could buy at 23.6p and sell at 23.63p! | dan de lion | |
26/6/2015 14:15 | Waiting for OFGEMS findings. Should get a trading update in July which might give insight into the progress of the investigation. | marine boy | |
26/6/2015 11:02 | a very frustrating hold here | gucci | |
26/6/2015 10:10 | EDR up today to 16.625p, so ALK's holding now worth £6.65m. | rivaldo | |
25/6/2015 10:20 | Yes. A break above the 25.5p level and I'll take some more. | pj 1 | |
24/6/2015 21:58 | I'm expecting a tick up on the bid tomorrow - buyers returning to this stock. | marine boy | |
24/6/2015 15:42 | It would be worth a lot more than that if an offer is ever made for Egdon! | dan de lion | |
24/6/2015 11:13 | EDR up to 15.75p. ALK's holding is now worth £6.3m. | rivaldo | |
19/6/2015 09:14 | Fox You, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. I'm in danger of posting on the wrong board here but EDR's shale assets are in addition to their conventional resources and were said, in a note by Edison, to add a value of 40p / share to EDRs valuation. Notwithstanding any potential shale assets, EDR's conventional Wressle field, should it prove bountiful, will add value to ALK's 18% holding of EDR. While this is all happening elswhere, AKL continue to be cash generative to the point where they have declared another dividend payable end of the month (now ex-divi). ALK have a number of projects in the pipeline for 2015 and the only thing holding this share price back is the OFGEM investigation into whether ALK & others have complied with Rule 5.13.1 (b) of the Capacity Market Rules. The Rule(s) in question: 5.13 Prohibition on other unreasonable business methods 5.13.1 The following activities are prohibited in relation to the Capacity Auction: (a) doing anything which would constitute a breach of any law intended to prohibit or restrict anti-competitive practices relevant to participation in the Capacity Auction; (b) submitting to the Delivery Body or the Authority any information in connection with the Capacity Auction which is false or misleading; ALK has responded in saying "Alkane does not believe it is in breach of the Capacity Market Rules and will fully cooperate with Ofgem’s investigation." If, like me, you have faith in the integrity, professionalism & capability of the management team, then ALK will come out smelling like roses. So let's not get too confused with fracking & ALK. ALK is not in the fracking business per se, but have an 18% holding in one that could but that is possibly going to hit upon a commercial conventional oil discovery in addition to their currently pumped sources. | marine boy |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
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