Emed Mining Share Discussion Threads

[paulie1] 27/12/2014 14:10

The eventual question is what is in it for them staying listed? Genuine question. What's the benefit

[cufes2] 27/12/2014 14:01

Pawsche

You appear to be one of the few posters on here that understands the full potential implications of what could happen here IMHO . . . I think the major shareholders are interested in the copper, control, dividends and then maybe share price growth . . . Liquidity is way down the list IMHO . . . And then there is the possibility of de-listing . . .

[estienne] 27/12/2014 13:44

In view of the disgraceful treatment metred out to Harry Angastoras Adams, Ronnie Beevor and Isaac Querub Caro could not have expected to be rewarded any better for their good work.

I run an ethical fund and view the share price as a reflection of this sad state of affairs. Don't be fooled into thinking you will make money on Emed. If a straight forward take over was on the cards there might be the prospect of an increase in the share price but this is not the case. The in fighting taking place both within the company and in the political arena has damaged the outcome, there are better and more ethical stocks to invest in and I shall be looking to withdraw fairly quickly in the new year.

[mronions] 27/12/2014 12:56

unsecured loan ... our lenders are fully behind this project , including Trafigura who as yet don't have a full seat on board.

whatever direction we were going before , in the Beaver days (ex Chairman)now changed ...

[scrappycat] 27/12/2014 12:50

Pawsche,

True, but at the expense of reduced liquidity. Everything has its price.

[pawsche] 27/12/2014 12:42

@LLB.. Let's use a 10p vs 5p placing as an example for simplicity...

Not quite... If the dilution at 5p gives them 80% of the company rather than the 60% they'd get at 10p they'll be receiving 80% of the profits via dividends rather than 60%.

[bewise2] 27/12/2014 11:53

Could the rp approval and mp come next week as the company expects or week beginning the 5th???? Big announcement on Wed new years eve would be amazing(heres hoping)

Well one thing for sure once the mp is announced for the 'historic Rio Tinto' this share price will fly and who knows who else could be waiting in the shadows to pounce on this mine once this happens....

Interesting few weeks/months ahead...the quarterly update to Dec End is due Mid Jan...

[scrappycat] 27/12/2014 11:48

Fools,

In reality, if financing is to be equity funded (not a certainty following the recent RNS), then it makes little difference to the 3 IIs in monetary terms, for they will put in the same relative amounts of money irrespective of the conversion price. This statement assumes the financial input is done on a pro rata basis in accordance with the number of shares held.

The only thing that will change is the actual percentage of the company each owns in relation to the total shares in issue. Between each other, the price is somewhat irrelevant, for whatever the conversion price, they will put in say $140 million between them (e.g. TRAF c$58m, XGC $c42M, Orion c$40m). If the financial input is done on a pro rata basis, in accordance with the number of shares held then, post dilution, the relative postions between the 3 remains identical

The lower the share price, the larger the number of shares in issue. There is little point in being listed if the 3 own such a high percentage of the company that the shares become virtually totally illiquid. I doubt that any of the 3 would want this situation for, not only would it immobilise the share price, but it makes the shares almost impossible to sell, even if they might wish to, other than to one of the other IIs. In effect, they would be in the same position as if there were a management buy out, and I doubt that XGC or Orion would want this.

The law of diminishing returns also applies. However much you lower the conversion price, you never reach 100%. You have to issue more and more shares to get a reducing rate of percentage increase in your holding. Liquidity reduces accordingly.

[duchaf] 27/12/2014 11:02

The reply after Rosa's recent outburst regarding local employment...

[cufes2] 27/12/2014 10:48

Fair enough . . . you're not concerned that the major shareholders are likely to participate in a low price placing IMHO . . . this would give them a bigger slice of EMED, dilute PIs more and give them a bigger slice of any future dividends . . . the EMED board have little choice in this matter given the need for a "bridging loan" and the BOD is now controlled by the major shareholders in reality IMHO . . .

[deme1] 27/12/2014 10:39

Think of the implications if the II's didnt give us the bridging loan! What would the share price be come January, with no permits and no cash! How much bang would they have got for their buck then.

Think of the implications if the sky started falling, think of the implications if Harry run of of jambon, think of the implications if copper reaches an all time high due to the increased interest in renewable energy.

I think emed is bad for your health Fools.

[cufes2] 27/12/2014 10:27

Think about the implications if you are a major shareholder . . . would you prefer to participate at 7p or 5p . . .

[deme1] 27/12/2014 10:20

Fools

how often does the share price go lower than the actual placement price when fund raising is imminent. No doubt they would want the best deal, who wouldnt! Yet if the deal is already written out at 7p (vans suggestion) just because the share price has hit the 5p mark I dont think the ii's would want to go back through months of new negotiations to get it at a lower price. Even if that was to happen then the share price would no doubt go lower again say 4p and so the cycle begins again.

Imo the ii's just want this mine producing! Not long now :)

[cufes2] 27/12/2014 10:15

If you were one of the major shareholders would you participate in a placing at 7p per share at a total cost of £X million . . . or a placing at let's say 5p per share for a total cost of £X million . . . resulting in obtaining more shares for the same amount of cash . . .

[laurence llewelyn binliner] 27/12/2014 10:11

..As above deme, I'm happy to have a large lab facility available.. forward planning..

I'm also looking forward to going there to see PRT one day too, I've no doubt it's an impressive site, I've only google earthed it so far.. and measured it..!

[deme1] 27/12/2014 10:09

27 lab techs overkill, have you lot forgot how big prt is!
There is no pleasing some on here. I for one am glad we have a big lab team, the sooner we map PRT the better for all of us.

[laurence llewelyn binliner] 27/12/2014 09:46

..Ref 27 lab technicians, that does seem a bit overkill really..
However consider what will happen to the local skill base to do the work with all the exploration rights up for grabs in the neighbourhood.
New miners setting up labs.., I consider this forward thinking and planning on the companies part, to get everyone trained up and then with any extra capacity we can offer an outsourced service to local explorers coming in who won't have a lab or the staff skill base, we're ahead of the curve.

Secondly look at our own resource upgrade potential, the amount of drilling and samples to analyse over the coming 2-3 years taking us from 5 up to 9-15MTPA, we don't want any mistakes digging big holes in the wrong place do we..

This is all coming together nicely IMO.. what's not to like..

I can now see the surface having been underwater for 5 years adding shares on ISA day, my next top up point is April 7th '15.. so averaging down may not be an option then..!

Just a small snowball and a hill that takes 7 years to roll down building as it goes along, that's long term investing not trading.., disappointing not to have been able to grab any @ 4-5p, but can't get the timing right every time.

Our share price could be back up to 8's/9's/10's in no time with some news and a tailwind..

Momentum building, permits next.. :o)

[stockknobjockeyvanbookstino] 27/12/2014 09:04

here you go Onions:

[mronions] 26/12/2014 22:51

it was Onions and his mate (who bought that sub 5p bloc other day) who said JL temporary departure said that a deal was on the table. usual suspects would not have it and they were wrong . that is why I believe they won't allow themselves to be positive the news. come on cheer up!!!

[mronions] 26/12/2014 21:38

Daily mail mention?

[scrappycat] 26/12/2014 21:36

I would not be at all surprised to see TRAF managing the mine. They have the expertise and infrastructure close to hand. It makes good sense for me, and I am inclined to think that EMED, XGC and Orion would feel the same way. However, TRAF do not have overall control, nor will they have in future if XGC and Orion keep their eye on the ball.

I doubt this was on the agenda until TRAF forced their way in but, now they are here, the others may think that it would simplify things considerably. I guess much would depend on how much TRAF would charge for such a service.

Mere conjecture of course.

[paulie1] 26/12/2014 19:28

A great man.. Once said in here the greatness of the company is based in the employees. Harry gone IQ gone the miner gone. Bookie you sure are correct!!

[mronions] 26/12/2014 18:32

well all said I don't think the Astor dude (who has moved on) was fully onside ... but then he was owed a lot of money. He was a legacy director . Had own agenda.

clearly there must have been two camps

The Beaver
Astor dude
IQ

vs Alberto and the rest

I wonder where the break was

what side of fence would Harry be?