We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.

Trending Now


It looks like you aren't logged in.
Click the button below to log in and view your recent history.

Hot Features

Registration Strip Icon for monitor Customisable watchlists with full streaming quotes from leading exchanges, such as LSE, NASDAQ, NYSE, AMEX, Bovespa, BIT and more.

GDP Goldplat Plc

0.00 (0.00%)
Last Updated: 08:00:00
Delayed by 15 minutes
Share Name Share Symbol Market Stock Type
Goldplat Plc GDP London Ordinary Share
  Price Change Price Change % Share Price Last Trade
0.00 0.00% 8.05 08:00:00
Open Price Low Price High Price Close Price Previous Close
8.05 8.05 8.05 8.05
more quote information »
Industry Sector

Goldplat GDP Dividends History

No dividends issued between 22 May 2014 and 22 May 2024

Top Dividend Posts

Top Posts
Posted at 20/5/2024 11:54 by lowtrawler
We have to remember there are a lot of moving parts with the TSF and how it should be reflected in our share price.

The Jorc has yet to be updated for the additional material.
The percentage recovery is subject to uncertainty.
We don't have certainty on any of the cost components.
The contract with DRD may yet hit unexpected obstacles.
We don't know exact timing.

However, I believe my calculations represent a fairly conservative view of value and would suggest a value for the TSF of between 10p and 15p on a NPV basis.

The Core GDP business is likely to generate around 2p per share attributable profit and so our current Share price represents only 4x attributable profit with the TSF thrown in for free.

IMV, the market will slowly wake up to the under-valuation and when GDP publish their own TSF plans, there will be a step change to the price.
Posted at 13/5/2024 12:33 by lowtrawler
Alm, I share your scepticism but tend to believe progress is being made on the TSF. As always, GDP will move at their own pace. Not long ago, SA would have been considered their core business and so it is worrying how quickly the rot has set in. It makes the SA minority buyout look poorly timed and priced.

So long as Ghana continues to perform, GDP still looks good value on their core business with the TSF thrown in for free. If Ghana were to wobble, the TSF would become critical.
Posted at 10/5/2024 11:39 by lowtrawler
shill10 - at that time, GDP had run some share buybacks which indicated they were starting to look at returning value to shareholders. Since then, they have had the trading suspension / accounts debacle; SA power outages; Ghana licensing problem; working capital increases; extra capex needs.....

It appears to me GDP will be able to generate around 2p of after tax annual attributable profit on a consistent basis. If they indicate at least 1p of this will be returned to shareholders, that alone would return us to 12.5p. The TSF is clearly going to be worth at least 10p per share and once a route to monetising the TSF is published, a large chunk should be reflected in the share price

A bid from DRD would obviously accelerate the share price appreciation but GDP have it within their own power to move the share price into the teens.
Posted at 03/5/2024 22:08 by kimboy2
Well, the first thing is whether DRD would want GDP.

DRD are used to buying up heaps of tailings. In this case they would be buying a heap with a profitable niche company attached. What is more they could buy it with GDP's share of the profit of a theoretical contract,

Seems a no brainer to me.

If a bid is to be made then Martin Ooi is key. Unless they get him on board DRD cannot make the bid unconditionalas as they need 90% of the shares. They won't be able to delist or mop up the rest of the shares.

One or two reasons why I think a bid is better than a 50/50.

Firstly DRD is the one in control of the TSF. They can string it out,or duck out or whatever and GDP don't have many alternative routes to monetise the heap. At least not as profitably.

If DRD really wanted GDP they could play dirty and GDP shares may be marooned in much the same place as they are now, or less.

Martin Ooi will be aware of this,plus the virtual impossibility of getting rid of such a large holding on the open market. He certainly won't want his money marooned for potentially years in such a risky environment as South Africa.

The alternative for him is to develop the TSF and pay it out as a dividend. I believe the Aussie tax rate on the CGT of a sale would be half of the income tax on a dividend.

I have no doubt that GDP will, in theory, be worth more if they develop the TSF, but cash in hand comes at a premium.

I suspect MO is expecting 20p, but would take 17p. he is at an average cost of 5-6p (?).

One thing that is never considered is what are MO's personal circumstances. He has a medical practice in Australia. Is he indebted? Would the cash be better deployed in his medical practice?

The opportunity cost of the cash to MO may well be the deciding factor,if a bid emerges.
Posted at 25/3/2024 11:32 by lowtrawler
kb2, from what I can see, Gravitas expect their machines to be installed at the source of the coal tailings. Presumably, the transport costs for anything else would be prohibitive. Consequently, you have to ask why anyone would hire GDP to run a machine on their own site rather than doing it themselves. After all, they will already have the coal customers and, if GDP can make a profit, the machine should pay for itself quickly.

GDP have no expertise in coal. No expertise in running on-site recovery operations. It is a new technology, as yet unproven in the real world. To my eye, it looks like another fruitless venture likely to eat up management time and end up delivering no financial return.
Posted at 22/3/2024 11:56 by lowtrawler
dinky00, GDP have the power to fundamentally shift the share price without spending any money. All they need to do is publish the TSF plans in a shareholder friendly way. Imagine if the TSF plans said something along the lines of:

- All TSF net profits to be paid out as special dividends
- Expected profile: 2025 $2m; 2026 $10m; 2027 $10m.....

Analysts would plug the special dividends into their models and we would have lift off. It is information GDP almost certainly already have and it simply needs published in a way that has maximum impact on the share price.

Of course, if they introduced a regular dividend policy and share buyback scheme at the same time, we could have a share price exceeding our dreams.
Posted at 22/2/2024 19:03 by kimboy2
Well if we just look on an operating basis then I think GDP is cheap. It can of course be argued that there is no trigger to move it to something more realistic till it starts issuing dividends.

I think that is reasonable and I expect in the coming period cash flow will improve and they will start buy backs. Having said that GDP is operating in Africa and is accident prone os who knows.

That of course is not the whole story. There is the TSF. We don't know;
1. How much the TSF is worth.
2. When production will happen.

We know, or think we know, that the TSF is worth a lot relative to the GDP market cap, and it is going to happen, probably quite soon.

I reckon the post tax revenue from the TSF is likely twice the current market cap of GDP.

If that were true then the trigger event is the TSF and when it happens.
Posted at 21/2/2024 23:38 by lowtrawler
kimboy, last year they generated £3m operating cash flow of which they chose to spend £3.8m buying out minority shareholders who would have had no choice but to sell to GDP for a fraction of that price or to stay invested. That also caused them to incur over £0.5m in borrowing costs for the minority shareholder buyout.

£3.8m may well have been a fair price to pay but the value to GDP shareholders was less than half this amount and if GDP had shareholders best interests in mind, they would not have paid more than half this amount.

Take away the dilutive spending and GDP generated £3m. A huge amount in comparison to the current share price
Posted at 23/1/2024 18:39 by kimboy2
I reckon that the GDP heap is about 3 days supply to Ergo. ISTR that the suggestion was GDP would do about 1-200,000 tpm.

Presumably they are not going to stop the plant to put the GDP stuff through. That means that the JORC is going to be the basis of the contract with DRD.

It would seem sensible to leave it as late as possible to allow as much as possible to be dumped on there.

Presumably DRD have already been doing tests on the material to find out how the GDP TSF fares under their processing. This also will form part of the contract.

Once the button is pushed the only thing that will be unknown for GDP is the price of gold. The tonnage, amount of gold and recoverability will already be in the contract.

It would seem a reasonable assumption that DRD's process is sub-optimal for the GDP heap. That may be why GDP is so cagey about the recovery rate.

The question for the board was whether GDP could have a sufficiently high recovery rate to have compensated for DRD's low processing cost and relatively low capital expenditure.

Plus of course the management time that would have been taken up with it. In addition GDP is getting a load of freed up storage space.

Probably a no brainer but depends on what % of profits DRD want. I presume that this has already been agreed otherwise what basis are they proceeding on.
Posted at 22/1/2024 19:52 by kimboy2
What I think we know from the Ergo feasibility study is;

1. The recovery rate is between 30-60% and averages 41.1%

2. The head grade of gold into the plant is 0.28g/t

3. At a recovery rate of 41.1% this gives a production of 0.115g/t

4. The processing cost is $5.3/t of feed ore. This is standard for all ore as they do not tailor it for feed type or grade, so it is constant.

Ergo Plant
At a production grade of 0.115g/t it requires 270 tons of ore to produce 1 ounce of gold.

270 x $5.3 = $1431 which is the cost of production per ounce, on average.


GDP's TSF was estimated to have 81,959ozs (ignoring additional material)

If we assume 30% recovery we get 24,587ozs. Revenue at $2000 = $49m

The total tonnage is 1.43mt. at $5.3/t this works out at $7.58m

The total LoM capex for Ergo is $250m.

There are many ways to apportion the GDP part.

I would suugest that our 1.43mt is about 7% of one years feed. The life of mine is 20 years.

The attributable cost will be about $1m


On pretty minimal assumptions it looks as though the TSF profit will be at least $40m. The question is how this is to be split between DRD and GDP.

The DRD profit margin is 23% on the LoM plan which would be about $10m, but I think that may be a starting point for DRD given the limited alternatives for GDP.

Always a possibility of a bid if Martin Ooi decides to take it.

Your Recent History

Delayed Upgrade Clock