Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Ariana Resources Plc LSE:AAU London Ordinary Share GB00B085SD50 ORD 0.1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  0.00 0.0% 3.60 368,517 07:46:54
Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price
3.50 3.70 3.60 3.60 3.60
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
Mining 5.09 0.45 8.0 39
Last Trade Time Trade Type Trade Size Trade Price Currency
14:18:35 O 6,764 3.696 GBX

Ariana Resources (AAU) Latest News

More Ariana Resources News
Ariana Resources Investors    Ariana Resources Takeover Rumours

Ariana Resources (AAU) Discussions and Chat

Ariana Resources (AAU) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Ariana Resources trades in real-time

Ariana Resources (AAU) Top Chat Posts

Ariana Resources Daily Update: Ariana Resources Plc is listed in the Mining sector of the London Stock Exchange with ticker AAU. The last closing price for Ariana Resources was 3.60p.
Ariana Resources Plc has a 4 week average price of 3.60p and a 12 week average price of 3.58p.
The 1 year high share price is 5.25p while the 1 year low share price is currently 3.35p.
There are currently 1,096,677,943 shares in issue and the average daily traded volume is 896,173 shares. The market capitalisation of Ariana Resources Plc is £39,480,405.95.
d1g3y: Looking back to when we had the share price rise from 2.5p to 6p. It started early 2020 and coincided with initial production from Kiziltepe (which was better than expected) Looking forward it's initial production from Tavsan that I see at the main thing that could rerate the current share price As stated previously it looks like we are priced as a producer rather than explorer *just look at the share price reaction to some of the great exploration updates we have had over the last couple of years*If we are also looking at production from Venus 15 months after IPO this and dividend are reasons for holding/adding.Everything else is future pipeline 5+ years away which I don't believe is in the price.
jaf1948: There appears to be two Arianas - one where the progress over the last four years has been tremendous and share price in that time is three times what it was, and the other Ariana which is run like an autocracy and where the share price is down a quarter in the past year despite a special dividend. Both fit the known facts. It is simply a question of which one will prevail. As ever, you pays your money....
jaf1948: Charles, Do I think KS is an idiot ? Anything but. Do I think KS is a great geologist and an asset to any mining company ? Totally. Do I like his strategy ? Bits of it are good and bits of it are strange (like keeping so much cash locked up in a time of high inflation) but overall it is a strategy which might well succeed in a ten-year time scale, at least the bits that have been explained to us. So what don't I like ? A CEO of a public company has obligations to its shareholders. KS does not feel that it is an important part of his job and does it to a minimum when at all. Our share price has fallen around 25% in the past year despite all the 'exceptional progress' that Biggles mentioned. KS clearly doesn't see the share price as an important metric at the moment - I disagree.
kaos3: TA - what I see is H&S - meaning share price going even lower. As gold is dropping - it really might go even lower - combining 1. POG 2. TA 3. current AAU situation of not controlling the situation I always created my life as AAU did - I never take responsibility for anything as nothing about my life is in my hands. By creation. As I do not like being responsible and I like doing as low effort as possible outside of my bubble of competence. And it is not my psycho failure. I am clever ! So I admire AAU perfection in doing it. Might even add on the fall.
zangdook: If the directors don't influence the share price, what does it mean to say that grants of options are intended to motivate them? If having some cheap options motivates them to somehow cause the share price to rise, then it follows that the prospect of new options being issued motivates them in the opposite direction.
jaf1948: biggles, Depends how you look at it. No, the directors are not actively manipulating the share price. However, with the lack of PR and paucity of information on upcoming events, one can argue they are doing nothing to support the share price.
zangdook: 6.4 is the two year high. From memory it got a bit higher than that in 2012, maybe 6.8? But I agree the directors are motivated to have the share price oscillate, dropping as low as possible every time new options are issued and then rising again so they can dump stock to raise the cash to exercise them. Rinse and repeat. The investment case is that the company is slowly being built up despite the shenanigans, and so the share price should be on a general upward trend. IMV this can only really be a long term bottom drawer type investment.
xow98: My understanding of Deal: 1. NM purchases 4% of AAU (3% of WTR) for $2.5m at 10% premium. $2.5m to fund Alliance (assume this means WTR). WTR also gets access to NM database + AAU gets extension of Turkey database to 2031. 2. 5 yr alliance - NM to provide any additional funding requirements of WTR via option to purchase AAU shares. Additional funding relates to pre-identification of "a project of sufficient merit for further development by NM. (Does NM's option to further invest in AAU also carry a 10% premium? RNS is silent on the option). 3. Assume external 25% holder of WTR would have to initially contribute additional circa $0.833m for their portion, but this is not stated. Not sure how far $3.33m (2.5 + 0.833) gets one down the path, but would seem likely that NM would have to further invest in AAU to fund WTR. 4. If project of sufficient merit, "Mining Company" set up 100% owned by WTR (i.e. 75% by AAU). 5. NM buys 60% earn-in to "Mining Company" over a 2 year period for $1m. This would appear to be over and above its holding in WTR via AAU holding. 6. NM to invest further $15m on PFS. If JORC of >2m oz, results in 75% earn-in for NM(+ WTR holding via AAU). 7. If progress to mining project, funding pro-rata. If WTR does not contribute, NM earn-in escalates to 85%. (WTR would retain 15% of which 11.25% would be for AAU). 7. If either party withdraws or dilutes to <10%, interest relinquished for a 2% NSR. Not sure how further dilution would occur as there doesn't appear to be a provision for NM to increase their earn-in above 85%. Assuming my understanding above is correct, all else being equal and the project developing fully, AAU will own 11.25% of a >2m oz gold mine at almost zero cost (though there is shareholder dilution within AAU). Corrections welcome.
gerrystewart: Soul, re the 'dilution' debate, I refer you to 2 items appearing in 'Investopedia viz; 1. By leslie Kramer on 29th january 2022 on 'How to determine stock price and market cap' with a section entitled 'Misconceptions about Market Capitalization' 2. By Barclay Palmer on March 21st 2022 on 'the dangers of dilution' where he gives numerical examples. One example demonstrates dilution (i.e earnings per share would fall since the shares were issued at below market price). Importantly, although there isn't a 'worked' example of the a kind of situation we have debated/discussed (i.e Newmont (NM)being issued new shares at a premium to the existing market price)the following is noted, ' securities can anti-dilutive' if being issued at a premium to the market price because it would result in the opposite (i.e a rise in EPS). OK, so you might not wish to be bothered reading those so let me return to the hypothetical example you provided of Newmont taking over AAU for 100m. If this transpired, the 100m would reflect Nm's assessment of the true value of AAU. Due diligence would look at all assets (tangible and intangible). All this would have a strong element of subjectivity. However, the easiest asset to calculate is cash and if all other non-cash assets (including intangibles and allowing for some 'goodwill') were valued at, say, 80m then we would expect the other 20m of the bid price to reflect the cash on the balance sheet notably 20m. If there wasn't 20m (let's say because NM had not paid 2.5m for the 46m shares which were not issued) then we would expect the bid price to reflect this (i.e there would only be 17.5m of cash and the bid would be only 97.5m). So, you would have either 100m to be divided between the 'old' number of shares plus the 'new' 46m shares (the 100m reflecting the fact that there was more assets (cash) than previously) or 97.5m to be divided by only the 'old' number of shares (because the asset base was not boosted by the issuing of new shares for 2.5m) There would be no dilution of the asset value per share. The dilution that you refer to is a dilution of 'ownership' not 'value'.
actonovator: In a perfect market and all other things being equal, if AAU diluted 46m shares at 10% above share price every week for a year and earned a modest return on that cash (say 3-4%), the share price would probably be more than a £1 after a year. Open to correction by statisticians only!
Ariana Resources share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
Ariana Res..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

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

P: V: D:20220625 19:28:34