Ferro-alloy Resources Share Discussion Threads

[jailbird] 20/2/2021 09:18

mes

no..talking about FAR..sorry i deleted it now by mistake

i was referring to the recent institutional holders who sold out

[mesb48] 20/2/2021 09:01

jb, are you referring to the HZM interview?

[jailbird] 19/2/2021 13:18

If major shareholders wants to part of the bigger financing , you get precedence by being a current shareholder But they all sold out .. that is not a good sign to me.Still being traded for 20% gains Between 9-12p

[cyberbub] 19/2/2021 12:43

No :-)Big shareholders can come on board in the Stage 1 financing. That's the real prize here. $20M investment opportunity (plus $80M in debt).

[jailbird] 19/2/2021 12:25

Cyber,

Just listened too a good point made by a CEO for another miner I am invested in.

He informed the importance to have big shareholders on board as this will support and assist in the big financing required of the construction of the project. Without that it is difficult to get competitive large debt and equity financing.

Now FAR major shareholders have all sold out.

So where does it leave this Co? BoD are in a weak position do you not think?.

[cyberbub] 19/2/2021 12:16

Something definitely going on with volume the last few days...

[jailbird] 17/2/2021 13:05

Mes Thanks , very much what I asked too but received no reply So will not email again as we have to wIt for the next update Still sitting on sidelines

[mesb48] 17/2/2021 12:00

I asked the obvious questions really (in my eyes anyway!) 1) status of the powerline/arc furnace projects and therefore the current production run-rate, 2) what is the remaining spend required to complete those projects and therefore the near-term funding requirement (ignoring the bigger project further down the line) to get to the $10m p.a. cash flow previously indicated and 3) latest timing on the bigger project feasibility study.

I also asked if he would do a more direct shareholder Q&A (either interview or written answers on website) - he seems concerned this might give out price sensitive info - but loads of other companies find a way to do it.

Tried to make the point the small value/infrequent bond issues (whilst helpful I think in getting local investors engaged) eroded investor confidence in the near-term funding requirement - and if funds are needed near term, something bigger/bolder/clearer would be preferable... but thinking about this, I realise I am a relative newcomer investor and longer term shareholders might scream at the thought of more dilution so he may feel he cannot win that one. Anyhow I shared my perspective.

Have found another interview i'd not found before from last October at the china mining club - quite short, had a few different slides worth watching if you have not seen it although much of the material is the same as other presentations

[jailbird] 17/2/2021 11:03

Can I ask what you asked Mes?I am going to email him again

[mesb48] 17/2/2021 10:58

I've had a reply from NB. He said my questions would be answered in the next operations update although he did not state exactly when that would be...

Good to have started a dialogue and the opportunity to share perspectives even if he rightly is not going to share specific details in correspondence with individual shareholders.

[jailbird] 16/2/2021 19:23

What's nice at paying 10.8p ?Some nice sells towards the end of the day too

[cyberbub] 16/2/2021 15:29

Nice buy - 175k at 10.80p

[cyberbub] 15/2/2021 08:30

Interesting this morning - some news incoming??

[red rook] 12/2/2021 08:28

... I'm not invested here but have this on my watch list ... ticked up the last few posts.
... I agree, the CEO needs to be bold and do a placing. Raise the money required to complete the remaining work required, the BFS, and have enough money for ANY working capital to see them through to ramp up. He needs to stop waffling and dithering and get on with it!
....IMO raise a further £5m even if it's at around the 8p mark. £1-3m is not enough! Do it in one go NOT in dribs and drabs.
... Also, although the assets have great potential I just don't think this CEO is up to delivering this. IF he just had the sense to move over to a non- exec Chairman position, and appoint a CEO with the drive and market recognition to deliver this. Unfortunately, there are many companies with great assets on aim BUT just fail to deliver because the CEO is not up to the job.

... all IMHO ... and will keep on my watch list.

[jailbird] 11/2/2021 20:05

The potential resource appears always to be a major asset . The BFS will unlock that value. BoDs know that but are in no hurry to complete it .My problem has never with the resource , my problem is with the BoDs. I am not convinced they have expertise to deliver it to production.I just do not get it . This is why I get cynical.

[mesb48] 11/2/2021 19:52

OK, I will try to write to NB (politely again).... and let you know the outcome.

[cyberbub] 11/2/2021 16:57

Well this is what I've said previously. The resources, financial and technical opportunities at FAR seem outstanding, and there is IMO a credible plan for reaching them. The only key question for me is whether the management are able to exploit the opportunities effectively -that's where the risk lies. The opportunity certainly seems attractive.

NAI

[jailbird] 11/2/2021 15:00

Mesb100% with you on that Good luck with asking some direct questions and getting a reply.NB wants to remain vague it seems

[cyberbub] 11/2/2021 14:27

Mesb why not drop NB a line and politely say as a shareholder that although the share price is lower than everyone would like, you'd be happy for them to not mess around, and raise £1-2M to finally get the remaining works and BFS finalised?Frankly if the company did that then I wouldn't be surprised to see the share price rocket to a much higher level than any placing price, as it would remove the uncertainty and probably guarantee the company moving into decent profitability from the small plant, plus get the BFS issued and start negotiating a finance package.

[mesb48] 11/2/2021 14:15

I don’t mind the bonds as a means to get local investors involved without diluting the equity. But drip-feeding them in such small quantities is ridiculous and seems chaotic. Agree what’s needed is a clear statement of what capital investment is needed to deliver what outcomes and then just get on with it. I’ve watched I think now all the interviews NB has given in the last 12 months and it’s just all a bit vague in terms of what is going on. Will gladly add to my investment if he could more specific, hopefully there will be some announcement soon.

[cyberbub] 10/2/2021 15:08

"Just raise the money and get on with it" - yes I agree, as stated!

[jailbird] 10/2/2021 14:38

I am going mad , thanks for correctionI could say reason before but now that dilution would be small , why the need for bonds . Something not right .There is no need , just raise the $3m And get on with it . After all the bonds have still have to be paid with interest

[cyberbub] 10/2/2021 12:54

I assume/hope you're not in charge of anything mathematical, jailbird LOL

$1.5M (=GBP 1.2M) at 10p is a 3.6% dilution, not a 50% dilution!!

That's exactly why I am not worried about them raising a modest amount to get the 3 remaining items finished off. At a £30M market cap it's not a massive dilution. Let them get on with it, and then we can move on!

[jailbird] 10/2/2021 12:22

If we meet half waysAt 10p for $1.5m = 150m dilution so an increase in 50%I am not sure of the delay , maybe no appetite from the institutions ?I am still concerned that the Co has issued these repeat bonds And issued shares to pay for wage costs Co is really running on bare bones , and has no meaningful cash flow The problem is every delay in the power line is having a big knock on effect on the balance sheet and ongoing concern of the business .Tell me something , I still do not get why like most Cos do , why the BFS has no clear roadmap for completion