We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
| 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% | 7.50 | 08:00:00 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.50 | 7.50 | 7.50 | 7.50 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| MINING |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 06/4/2024 09:46 by ih_692232 Interesting observation-patienceI invested a substantial sum into this company over a decade ago-I had one dividend payment well over ten years ago - so have I been patient??? Has it been a good investment so far - no We have here a company run for the benefit of whom? Shareholders is correct answer -and for shareholders the last ten years has yielded zilch The board you see don’t have to think about rewarding shareholders because they see shareholders as incapable of acting together to effect change in the company that the shareholders actually own The board need to be clearly made aware that shareholders are entitled to and expect reward and that a company should be run properly to make sure there are profits to distribute -it’s a chip shop the way it’s been run and they can get away with it if their first priority every year was to from profits pay a dividend the company would be run differently Its in effect a loan of capital that they never need pay any interest on The board takes on business loans oh and gosh they have to pay interest on them What’s the difference ??? Oh shareholders don’t get any interest (dividend) at all !!!! Alm |
Posted at 04/4/2024 16:46 by lowtrawler kimboy, appreciate your views. I'm a little concerned Martin had to intervene on kili. I believe it was obvious to most we needed to get rid.In terms of the TSF, the JORC is out of date and we have no idea what timeline GDP are working towards. It is an easy ask for them to confirm they will prepare an up to date JORC by x date, expect to have an agreement in place with DRD by x date and will publish a full plan by x date. Asking for a dividend / buy back policy is not asking for a dividend to be paid or buy backs to happen. They may need to retain cash for the TSF, generators, ore acquisition etc. It simply sets an expectation of how shareholders will be rewarded. None of what I am looking for would necessarily alter what they intend to do. It would simply allow shareholders to know what it is they intend to do. |
Posted at 03/4/2024 23:35 by lowtrawler shill10, we all know GDP has not been run in the best interest of shareholders. When Martin acquired his stake, there was a lot of hope he would cause that to change. Other than a lukewarm share buyback, we have seen little evidence of improvement.We can give the benefit of the doubt. There have been reasons for retaining cash rather than returning it to shareholders. However, the continued poor communication and absence of dividend policy indicates shareholders are still not high on the agenda. As a director, Martin may not need improved communication and he will likely set the dividend policy which could be why we have seen no improvement. As a small company, I don't want to distract management from running the business by focusing on us but we do deserve better. A shareholder group is highly unlikely to make any difference but proper engagement with Martin could. |
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 14:44 by lowtrawler dinky00, what you say would be true if anyone thought the profits being made belonged to the shareholders. Time and again, we have seen GDP spend profits on projects that ended up going nowhere leaving shareholders empty handed. You see an equivalent in certain companies where most of the profits being made end up being paid as bonuses to the senior management and Directors.Unless the profits are paid for the benefit of shareholders, there is no reason for them to form the basis of our share price. In most companies, the logic would be that shareholders receive x% in dividends and the retained profit is reinvested in profitable activities that expand the business and end up making more than the original retained profit. With GDP, at best, retained profits help defend the existing business and do not appear to add shareholder value. In this regard, it is difficult to see what benefit shareholders get from the profits being made. |
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 TSF 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 Capex 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 Conclusion 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. |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
Hot Features
Premium
