Oxus Gold Share Discussion Threads

[john henry] 29/10/2015 15:21

Don't get sucked in the by meaningless chart comments here. share price is going nowhere until Binary decision whenever that maybe.

Seller on the offer will keep this in the low 4s high 3s

[wulber] 29/10/2015 15:15

Ok so 46p - 110p.Happy to be corrected for a higher pay out!

[dave444] 29/10/2015 15:14

Wulber if you look at the claim it is minimum $552.4m excluding Khandiza restitution - it is clearly quoted in this board header.
Furthermore 6-8 was originally posted by myself but in fact RS has stated that there are a number of variables that will determine the Calunius share.

[festario] 29/10/2015 15:14

I see that the excitement has fizzled out, and the stalemate wears on.

[wulber] 29/10/2015 15:11

The valuation by the company value the potential claim between $489 and $1250 mn.It is envisaged from a previous link that the lawyers will take c. 6-8 times their investment so between c. $35 - 50 mn, but lets assume $50 mn.There are approx. 715 mn shares in issue.This equates to c. 40 - 110p per share award if successful.

[goodbloke1] 29/10/2015 15:04

Someone please correct me if our costs were much more!

[goodbloke1] 29/10/2015 15:02

Wilfy The Canadian company were awarded about 750 mill dollars (2.5 times their costs which were about 300 mill dollars.)If that is a crude measure of award that would give us about 200 to 300 mill dollar range.I agree we should be awarded much more using DCF etc.

[dave444] 29/10/2015 14:57

It looks like time for a reminder of what the company think is the appropriate range!

dave444 - 17 Oct 2015 - 07:12:53 - 26128 of 27054
Taking on board comments of Wilfy (warrants and options)adds 11m to 704m = 715m.

Claim range excluding Khandiza restitution is $552.4m to $1250.5m!

Payout at 715 million shares:

$552.4m = $0.77
$643.5m = $0.90
$715m = $1
$786.5m = $1.10
$858m = $1.20
$929.5m = $1.30
$1001m = $1.40
$1072.5m = $1.50
$1144m = $1.60
$1215.5m = $1.70
$1250.5m = $1.75

Have to take Calunius take off this and add any interest payment awarded.
Also should receive basic legal costs currently $6.15m.

[nick2412] 29/10/2015 14:57

Thanks for that insight wilfy. I think you are citing from the 1976 rules and there are a revised set in 2010.



Very sensible to be realistic and, likewise, I wouldn't base calculations on any potential return on getting a proportion of the Calunius position refunded but, from a laymans perspective, Article 40 does seem to give the Arbitrators some leeway.

Wouldn't Oxus's lawyers use Article 40 to argue that the only practical way Oxus could fund the case was via a success fee arrangement and therefore this success fee 'other cost' is 'reasonable' and should be partly or wholly reimbursed?

From Article 40 (e) ....

"The legal and other costs incurred by the parties in relation to the arbitration to the extent that the arbitral tribunal determines that the amount of such costs is reasonable."

[wilfy75] 29/10/2015 14:53

goodbloke, if you don't mind, would you mind sharing the assumptions which you use in assessing the value of this stock? Mine are set out in post 26941.

[goodbloke1] 29/10/2015 14:36

Kowe.There is realism and stupidity.No way would oxs agree to 50% of fee.A placing of say 2p would have been better value if they were that desperate!

[wilfy75] 29/10/2015 14:31

I suppose the point is that even people as naturally miserable as me still conclude that this stock, at this price, is worth an investment given that my assessment is that there is a 70% chance of the realistic upside materialising (I agree with you kcowe as to a realistic outcome though would be delighted to be proved to have underestimated!).

GLA. DYOR. NAI.

[kcowe] 29/10/2015 14:26

I don't see crazy high prices here ... may be 15-20p tops and calunius taking up to half the proceeds.Thats a realism I can live with.

[the stigologist] 29/10/2015 14:19

Highlighted this earlier. Retrace looks to be done and MACD/RSI on the turn.



Now also seeing volume tick up.

Rising on high volume, Falling on low volume is in itself a positive confirmatory signal.

[kcowe] 29/10/2015 14:19

Great post wilfy75.. I prefer miserable realism any time.

[the stigologist] 29/10/2015 14:17

Bowl thesis playing out

[wilfy75] 29/10/2015 14:14

Nick - your post regarding dilution of shares etc. I'm afraid that line of argument won't work. The company has brought the claim, the company is entitled to compensation assuming that the panel concludes that the BIT has been breached. The fact that the company has a number of shareholders whose holdings have been diluted is, sadly, irrelevant. In other words, a claim worth, say, $1bn does not become more valuable because the company issues shares, it's still a $1bn claim.

The level of share price at certain times in the past, or offers per share are also irrelevant on a "per share" basis though my be useful indicators of market value when looked at for the company as a whole.

My final point for now is that I doubt that the panel will award an uplift to bear the Calunius cost. This is for a number of reasons. Article 38 of UNCITRAL's 1976 rules (which apply to our arbitration) states that the following costs are recoverable:

(a) The fees of the arbitral tribunal to be stated separately as to each arbitrator
and to be fixed by the tribunal itself in accordance with article 39;
(b) The travel and other expenses incurred by the arbitrators;
(c) The costs of expert advice and of other assistance required by the arbitral
tribunal;
(d) The travel and other expenses of witnesses to the extent such expenses are
approved by the arbitral tribunal;
(e) The costs for legal representation and assistance of the successful party if
such costs were claimed during the arbitral proceedings, and only to the extent
that the arbitral tribunal determines that the amount of such costs is
reasonable;
(f) Any fees and expenses of the appointing authority as well as the expenses
of the Secretary-General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague.

Costs of funding aren't included. People will try to squeeze this into "costs for ... assistance of the successful party" but, as a lawyer, I'd be stunned if this provision was applied this way. It is in a paragraph about legal costs and principles of interpretation (particularly contra proferentem and ejusdem generis for those who like legal Latin) mean that unless a contrary intention is expressed (it isn't!) then these "assistance costs" would need to be analogous to legal costs (secretarial support, notarial services, translation services etc would all be examples).

I know that I will be accused of being miserable but I'd rather be accused of being realistic, rational and conservative (and very happy to be wrong!) if that's OK with everyone else!

GLA. DYOR.

[john henry] 29/10/2015 14:11

To much supply at the moment, someone keen to offload,

[midasx] 29/10/2015 14:05

someone happy to load up!

[kcowe] 29/10/2015 13:59

someone happy to unload .

[giant steps] 29/10/2015 13:59

All about volume, picking up

On aim 3.87m, on isdx 1m, total c4.87m

[evil_doctor_facilier] 29/10/2015 13:57

Like the guy said yesterday and was then instantly hounded on,supply at this price.
Makes no odds to outcome.

[john henry] 29/10/2015 13:53

At present there is definitely someone keen to load the offer in 100k slugs.

[giant steps] 29/10/2015 13:43

O/T

zaphod99, lets hope they have already reduced in FOGL prior to news today
(looks an over-reaction imo)

[giant steps] 29/10/2015 13:41

The chart reminds us of the journey

JAF reminds us of the outcome space with knowns, unknowns and possibilities.
(which is a good thing as it provides balance)