Fox Marble Share Discussion Threads

[wolstencroft] 07/10/2016 18:20

Current ownership of SA is 59% Fox, 1% Andrew Allner, 10% Etrur Albani and potential 3% Chris, so 73% already allocated, 27% free.

'free': Surely allocated to other 'advisors' and 'consultants'

I think as others have said here 100m means massive dilution. Surely we've all invested in gold mienrs and seen our shareholding reduced to nothing - e.g. a 10m company become a 100m company through a halving in the shareprice and 95m of fund raising?

[glennborthwick] 07/10/2016 18:17

Why on earth aren't they updating on getting the factory finished. If I was a holder that must be key to get better margin not chasing these pie in the sky deals. Get the stuff out. Get proper orders and make margin

[paleje] 07/10/2016 17:01

Valid points above but I don't think any of us can guess how things will work out at this stage because we simply don't have enough informtion.

I don't think they're going for €100m all in one go are they, it sounded from Chris's phone ramble as though they would raise 'at least' 100m but that it would be in phases as required over a couple of years with a view to having all the quarries in production within 5 years, cash revenues kicking in as they progress.

Current ownership of SA is 59% Fox, 1% Andrew Allner, 10% Etrur Albani and potential 3% Chris, so 73% already allocated, 27% free.

How they value that, how they carve it up and how potential shareholders perceive it remains to be seen. I'm sure we'll be the last to know.

Fox could do well, it could get cash or it could own something of disproportionate value to itself or both. It could also piggyback off SA's sales and marketing efforts, which will importantly have government backing, to improve its own core sales but then conflict of interest creeps in. But it could also be a damp squib as SA seems to be relying on Fox's knowledge, management, marketing and sales experience and to date that has not been too obvious....the difference now being government involvement particularly the US on the sales side.

For that reason I think we should get some good news for Fox soon because it will look pretty stupid as the driving force for the new venture if it can't even get its own baby off the ground on time. It might also need cash if it wants to maintain its stake in AS, depending how they value it and what investors are prepared to pay, again we just don't know yet.

So too many unknowns at the moment, still a punt but with more exciting potential prospects than it had a week ago imo.

[extrader] 07/10/2016 14:47

Hi EC,

Not disproportionate from CG's pov, of course.....

ATB

[effortless cool] 07/10/2016 14:38

gnnmartin,

If new investors put in E100m for a 50% stake, they are effectively valuing Stone Alliance in its current form at E100m, and FOX's 59% share at E59m. Since FOX's market cap is just £17m, this seems improbable.

Let's be (ridiculously?) generous and value a cashless Stone Alliance at E10m. Then FOX end up with 5.4% post fund-raising.

Don't forget that Chris Gilbert stands to get a 3% shareholding in Stone Alliance, if it is successful. Rather disproportionate in view of FOX's likely ownership post fund-raising, I would suggest.

[gnnmartin] 07/10/2016 14:07

Efortless, I can't make any reliable guess as to how much of the Stone Alliance equity will be offered in the fundraising, but it certainly won't be the 99+% you seem to expect. If (to make a guess) the offer is for a 50% share, then Fox's share of the company will be reduced to 25%, assuming they don't put up any money themselves.

I am virtually certain that Fox will not be putting in any money: they are not too flush themselves. Fox's stake in Stone Alliance and that of the other current shareholder, reflects the value of the work they put in to setting up SA, and not the cash they put in. Compare this with any flotation: you will find that the expected capitalisation of the company post flotation values the original holders equity at a high multiple of the companies net asset value prior to flotation.

However, given the history and the locality, there is a big credibility gap. I hold and hope. If this comes off, the shares are way undervalued, but that is a big 'if'.

[effortless cool] 07/10/2016 12:20

czar,

You're talking nonsense. Fox own 59% of Stone Alliance, Stone Alliance need to raise E100m. That means that Fox either contribute their share (E59m), which they clearly can't, or get diluted if they pay less. Their ownership will be negligible if they contribute nothing to the fundraising.

[paleje] 07/10/2016 10:55

Surely Fox will need to raise its part if it is to retain 59% ownership? Unless its all through debt which I doubt.

[czar] 07/10/2016 10:46

Its not Fox that is raising the funding, so no dilution, only benefits, well at least for 3 years.

[paleje] 07/10/2016 10:21

Cheers someuwin, TW doesn't sound very confident though. I suspect he's as in the dark as we are about where the money's coming from and how it's all going to work.

I listened to CG's proactive phone call earlier, he tailed into mumbling towards the end when asked how Fox was going. There's a lot of explaining and convincing to do in spite of the potential. I hope the factory is open and a US sales pathway identified before the first fundraise.

[czar] 07/10/2016 10:11

I can only see this deal as positive, Fox get 59% of Stone Alliance, Fox get fees from Stone Alliance, the distribution driven by this will only come from Fox in the next three years. After that I can't see it makes much sense for Fox to remain independent so some sort of takeover looks likely. The initial move to 12.5p looks like the right response IMHO.

[wolstencroft] 07/10/2016 10:06

Paleje good points and at least we're either invested here, or not, with eyes wide open. Good luck. I remember South China Resources landmark deal just before they went under. This deal here reminded me of that. It's definitely rabbit out of a hat tine for Fox but if they manage it there may be gains to be had.

[someuwin] 07/10/2016 09:53

New Fox Marble JV - still a buy

[paleje] 06/10/2016 14:41

Lots of co's have checquered histories, Wols, directors too. Many have met the insolvency practitioner machine (another bunch of crooks) but wouldn't want it flagged up. I have worked for receivers and have also bought from them and done deals with them, I've sat and watched bailifs come to gut a pub restaurant and then been persuaded to sit in their vehicles for a few hundred quid while the ex owners swifted the good stuff out the back door. It is comedy stuff and illegal but it happens.

Good companies still deal with them, disgraced directors still get back into other companies, the whole system is crooked. That's why I don't get too excited over Eboracum. You and others have done good research exposing their shenanigans, I just don't think it will matter in the long term. Assuming there is a long term:)

Brownie has a point, more explanation is needed, co-operation at the very least between the 2 cos seems a given, exactly how is yet to be made clear.

[wolstencroft] 06/10/2016 11:00

paleje: No I wouldn't when I ran a company. And nor would many companies. Why be seemingly associated with someone who refuses to answer liquidator's questions about 50k transferred to a bank account not in the company's name and 50k cash stolen in Paris, who copies someone else website?

Eboracum and Banyan are, I agree, distractions. As Eboracum provided 80% of the last 6 months' sales the question is: what future?

[brownie57] 06/10/2016 10:15

I fail to see how Fox can have an interest in "Stone Alliance" when they will be to all intents and purposes a competitor.
The only way this will work is if the two companies combine.
Have held Fox for some time as a long bet, and I am very puzzled by this announcement.
It raises more questions than it answers.

[paleje] 06/10/2016 00:31

Effortless,

I understand that Eboracum seem dodgy but if they came along to my business and offered me a few hundred k deposit to provide a service to them, and it wasn't illegal, I'd take it no problem. Wouldn't you?

It's impossible to know all the ins and outs, most AIM cos have things they're happier to keep hidden. I've never suggested they're pucker, only that they're a distraction and not the future. I still have that view in fact more so now. But I accept Fox isn't a widows and orphans stock. Not much on AIM is.

[glennborthwick] 05/10/2016 23:26

does fox own rex marble ltd or not?

[glennborthwick] 05/10/2016 23:10

albani seems dodgy as well; strange translation but he changed his name and had some dodgy stuff with a telecom company;

Rrustemaj in Media

Etrur Rrustemaj (Albani) has been Director General of Post and Telecommunications of Kosovo (PTK) from 2003 to 2008.

In 2007, the public company PTK signed a contract with Zvonko Veselinovic in 2007 for the installation of antennas to its north. It was made public in October 2011 from the "News". Also, Zvonko himself had received any payment from PTK as antenna guards there.

Veselinovic supposed to be mighty in the north and that leads many criminal activities. He was arrested by Serbian police last year and was released after a month.

PTK has paid him 1,000 euros per month on behalf of his wife, Ljiljana Bozovic, as rent for holding the antenna on their property.

[effortless cool] 05/10/2016 21:35

paleje,

I would suggest the "Ebacorum nonsense" reveals a great deal about the moral hazard associated with the management of Fox. That makes it uninvestable for me.

[effortless cool] 05/10/2016 21:33

gnn martin,

Say Fox have put in E100k for their 59% interest. Then, after raising E100m, their ownership share falls to 0.0999%. Hardly something to get excited about. CG, meanwhile, apparently gets 3% for himself.

So who benefits most from this arrangement, Fox or CG?

It's probably irrelevant, to be fair, since the idea of investors giving these characters E100m is surely pie in the sky.

[andy] 05/10/2016 20:04

glenn,

Yes I thought the same, maybe he is being cautious?

[glennborthwick] 05/10/2016 19:43

I'm amazed Tom w hasn't been all over this positive news and the last announcement as well. Wonder if heis too smelling a rat.

[glennborthwick] 05/10/2016 18:40

If you're going to tell a porky tell a big porky.

[paleje] 05/10/2016 15:03

Earlier in the Summer Chris said he was confident future sales would be US led, it seems to me opportunities are emerging here to do that and more with the goodwill of the host government for the mines and the world's biggest consumer the US on board. The appointment of Barbero is a good move, he's connected and respected both militarily and commercially.

I don't think SA will give a monkeys about Eboracum but getting Fox's current factory open and operating would be reassuring, he must be confident of that if money talks have started.