LSE company dividends information has been updated. You can find this is in the menu on any Quote page. ADVFN team.


Goldplat Plc

0.00 (0.0%)
Share Name Share Symbol Market Stock Type
Goldplat Plc GDP London Ordinary Share
  Price Change Price Change % Share Price Last Trade
0.00 0.0% 7.45 07:50:00
Open Price Low Price High Price Close Price Previous Close
7.45 7.45 7.45 7.45 7.45
more quote information »
Industry Sector

Goldplat GDP Dividends History

No dividends issued between 03 Jun 2013 and 03 Jun 2023

Top Dividend Posts

Top Posts
Posted at 16/5/2023 13:21 by ih_692232
The same pattern is being repeated -the share price is unsupported by any dividend so folk loose interest over time and sell
The company/board do not have the discipline of having to annually pay a dividend so can just drift along with free shareholders money (unpaid dividends)and nothing really matters
The share price will never gain ground until dividends are paid or the company gets sold
Neither seem likely for years to come
It’s a private little business for the board with no interest in the 75per cent shareholders
Martin 25percent seems content with the fanciful notions of growing the business
He is an insider so maybe he has more compelling evidence than the general shareholders-perhaps the tailings plan will miraculously reach fruition one day
And how do the board now sit as to the balls up over audit followed by the balls up over Ghana licence

Marks out of 10???

Posted at 09/5/2023 14:38 by lowtrawler
baht, regarding dividends. You are correct, GDP has never been an income provider. It has always preferred to develop the business or expand into new ventures, presumably with the intent of becoming larger and more profitable. They now have an extensive track record of failures following that strategy and so investors now naturally need more justification for any proposed expansion or diversification. IMV, GDP is now a mature business and should be looking to return funds to investors rather than use the funds internally.

If GDP wish to invest, they need to do a better job of explaining what, why and the level of return expected so they can be held accountable. If investing for financial return, there is nothing wrong with taking on debt to be paid from the investment returns while providing a return to shareholders.

I don't believe we are likely to hear anything further on the audit debacle. If it was the auditor's, they should not have been renewed and so I can only conclude it was a management problem and not an auditor problem.

Posted at 05/4/2023 18:16 by ih_692232
In simple terms if Martin was presently or persistently demanding of dividends would the board fly in the face of a shareholder who owns just shy of 30 per cent of the company ?
The conclusion I draw is this does not currently fit with his requirements

But as has been pointed out 70 per cent of shareholders could take a different view

I am at a loss to understand the failure to devise and publicly state a company dividend policy - provided there are profits some percentage of these could nigh on always go towards dividend

The share price does not demonstrate capital growth for shareholders

So what is left future Hope of share price capital growth ?? How ??

A small company like this is never going to show fair value without dividends

It’s all Hope value ….

And look at the price of gold ….

Has that been reflected in the share price ??

This company needs to be run better and smarter

Better communication
Better understanding of shareholders views
Better rewarding of shareholders

Otherwise it’s a private toy for the board to play with and fritter profits without consequence as has so sadly occurred these past ten years

The best shareholders can do is communicate directly to the board - e mail your views let them understand your concerns and demands as a shareholder
Begin a concerted bombardment of individual shareholders views to the board
Let them know what we think
The q and a at each quarter date is lip service to taking into account shareholders views

Posted at 05/4/2023 17:11 by lowtrawler
The inability of the BOD to look after shareholders was actually demonstrated with the GRL minority acquisition for an extra 17% in our SA business. The business was valued at over £20m in that transaction and we now own over 90%. Hence, our share of the SA business should be valued at over £18m or we effectively diluted ourselves by paying too much.

GDP were notified the minority holders wished to dispose of their holding. Who else was going to buy their holding other than GDP? Based on our market capitalisation at that time, the whole of GDP was only worth around £12m and so the SA business was probably valued at £8m within the GDP share price. To avoid dilution, GDP should not have valued the SA business at any more than £10m. Instead, it agreed to pay a valuation twice that amount. As I say, it is very unlikely they would have found any other buyer than GDP and so why did we agree to pay twice as much as it would be valued at following the acquisition?

At the end of the day, it will probably be a good piece of business when the TSF is monetised but it was dilutive and we almost certainly paid more than we should.

Posted at 05/4/2023 07:27 by kimboy2
I don't think you will get any flack, but I will disagree with you.

On Martin Ooi he holds 29% of the shares and his power is based on being able to propose and get through whatever he wants at the AGM. A so called shareholders representative is not going to make any difference to that.

It will come as no surprise that Martin Ooi is looking after himself. The question is are his interests materially different to the rest of ours, and I would say not. You may disagree with him but his interests are the same as ours, and he has far more of the facts than we do.

On Gerard he resigned so that he could spend more time sorting the GCAT debacle out. He is far more invested in that than GDP these days.

On the dividend this board seems to have got fixated. The facts are at the interims they had cash of £2.8m, between the companies, and produced a profit attributable to the shareholders at the interims of £1.7m.

Against that they have said that they need £1.75m for the TSF and maintaining current operations in the next 12-18 months. They also need to make £1m repayments next year on the loan for buying back the South African shareholding.

Then there is the fact that they are spending a lot of money on interest payments for working capital loans that they are needing to take out. Then there is the inventory that they are looking to build up to try and guarantee future production.

Then there is the capex that may be required to get the TSF underway which none of us know.

They could of course borrow money to pay a dividend, but I think that it would be a mistake to think that this would positively benefit the share price

On the other ventures clearly Kili was a huge and expensive mistake, for whatever reason. Ghana however has been a huge, and increasingly, benefit to the company.

I expect Brazil to be instantly profitable. It already is profitable.

The coal thing I have no idea because I have no facts, but I am not against diversification per se. Indeed I think it is necessary if GDP is to survive in the long run and expand. I see coal as more an investment with some of the TSF profits.

Of course the dividend scenario changes once the TSF cash starts to come in.

Posted at 05/4/2023 01:11 by greville1
Yes Bedacau and many others speak sense. Many constructive and sensible comments have been made. I too have read these posts for a number years via Google.

I have been a holder of GDP shares for a considerable time. About ten years ago when the company was concentrating on its core business - gold recovery - it was very profitable, trading in excess of 15p a share and paying a worthwhile dividend. Since then successive GDP managements have attempted to diversify with fairly disasterous results.

And now again GDP is trading profitably but we have in place a board of directors seemingly determined not to provide the potential shareholder value. Why no dividend? GDP could certainly afford to pay at least 1/2 pence a share or probaly more as has been suggested. Profits appear to be being frittered away again i.e.coal mining. Why no specifics relating to future tailings activities? Details were promised years ago. What were the circumstances necessitating Gerard Kisbey Green's hurried resignation as chairman? There appears to be little or no buying activity by current board members. Why? Do they not believe in the future of the company?

Shares were recently suspended because of late filings of accounts. BDO, a large and generally well respected firm of accountants, have been blamed for this. But perhaps it was because they required some clarication or explanation relating to details of some transactions with which they were not entirely happy or for other reasons out of their control.

Martin Oii is a member of the board and a number of your contributors have suggested that he has a great deal of influuence on the decisions being made.He owns less than 30% of the issued shares i.e. a minority shareholder. If he has undue influence in board decisions for his own benefit this is obviously a totally unsatisfactory state of affairs.What is the deal he has with GDP? And would it not be sensible to appoint another board member to represent the interests of the remaining 70% of shareholders
as there does not appear to be one at present.

It appears to me that currently GDP is being run for the benefit of the directors and perhaps their friends but not for the benefit of 70% of shareholders. Certainly shareholder value does not appear to be on the BOD's agenda.Why is the share price currently languishing below 9p when W.H.Ireland Ltd consider fair value to be 21p?

A dividend would almost certainly raise the share price and would also bring in a number of other investors who sensibly avoid non dividend paying companies.And also some long overdue specifics concerning the company's future tailings plans would be very welcome.

I am sure that I will receive a great deal of flack for this contribution but as a shareholder I have been very disappointed and frustrated at the direction this company have recently taken.

Posted at 30/3/2023 15:13 by lowtrawler
MF, my views on how to regard GDP will be defined by the dividend policy. If a meaningful dividend is introduced, I will retain and maybe grow my investment. I will wait until this years annual accounts before drawing my conclusion. It is possible the power outages, need to invest in the TSF and other capital commitments need to come first. My investment and trading in GDP have been fortunate and I am holding 300k which have only cost me a net £1k. Hence, I can afford to be patient.
Posted at 23/2/2023 20:26 by kimboy2
Well, I disagree that there was no commitment to prevent the delay in accounts again. A new CFO has been appointed and part of his remit is to look at what happened and stop it happening again. There is no reason to point fingers unless we are going to sue.

I think we will have a new auditor, and there was a commitment from Werner to get the next results out in October.

On dividends I think we have to be realistic. The company had £3m cash at the end of Q2/23 and had operating cash flow of £3m last year.

Against that they have planned maintenance expenditure of £1.5m this 12 months plus about £1m repayments on the loan they bought the BEE out with. In addition there is probably money to be spent on the new pipeline and maybe something with the coal lot as well.

Then there is working capital finance which was £300k in Ghana for example, as well as looking to build raw materials.

I am happy for them to buy back shares as and when. The big dividend will come with the stock dam being piped off to DRD. This is going to be spread over 5 years with payments probably being dished out as dividends.

On the coal thing Werner was clear that the company profile is recovery and they are looking at ways of diversifying within that. They are obviously looking at this coal company, but also beyond it.

The amount of gold material is gradually reducing and GDP needs to spread the risk.

On this coal deal firstly I have no idea how much of this £150k the 'small spiral plant' accounted for. However the plant seems to have materialised at Benoni so presumably some agreement a while ago, unless you can fit it in the boot of a car.

Another thing is that this company in Mpumalanga isn't a coal company. It is a coal technology company. Presumably they have developed this new coal washing technology but don't have the cash to make it.

It would seem that GDP will put the cash in to build this technology and put it into operation. GDP would be hoping that they benefit from profitably producing coal with the possibility of selling the technology on.

I don't see this as a new Kilimapesa.

The appointment of the new CFO is obviously a good idea, especially with the remit to look at how to reduce cash locked up in working capital and interest charges. Werner described this as 'the focus' of the next financial period.

Thought it was one of the more interesting presentations.

Posted at 23/2/2023 17:36 by ih_692232
Did not hear any undertaking about dividends-surplus cash for dividends? You can avoid paying dividends by always saying there is no surplus cash …absurdly CEO suggested could not pay dividends because no royalty received from carcal - if that’s what he is waiting for before paying dividends shareholders will never get a dividend
The sale proceeds of carcal have not been paid out as dividends -whereas that was suggested previously
The company has lost sight of shareholder interests -the owners interests -and instead are determined to spend every penny of surplus on “growth”
Without any detailed plan as to what that is
If it’s a coal mine then that is madness

No capital return for shareholders

If they made this a priority policy the share price would ramp up
The market has no idea what the growth plan is - or whether it will represent a further withering away of profits
Kimpessa all over again ???

Posted at 16/8/2022 14:06 by lowtrawler
kimboy, they probably couldn't do buybacks while the trading announcement is pending and inside knowledge on the TSF may also prevent them.

Appreciate your view on dividends. A small initial dividend would make sense. I believe ongoing dividend levels of 1p should be affordable. As you say, the Special Dividends from the TSF will be on a whole different level.

With a 10% dividend yield, a 1p dividend should nail on 10p share price. If they produce a plan suggesting 10p of special dividends over, say, a 3 year period, 15p becomes realistic. Stick around for 3 years and we might have 13p of dividends and shares at 10p for a total 3 year return of 23p for the current 8p price. Low risk and almost 3 bag return.

Your Recent History
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

Log in to ADVFN
Register Now

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 |

V: D: 20230603 07:41:23