We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for real-time alerts, custom portfolio, and market movers
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Stock Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Phoenix Copper Limited | PXC | London | Ordinary Share |
| Price Change | Price Change % | Share Price | Last Trade
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.625 | 4.39% | 14.875 | 16:10:17 |
| Open Price | Low Price | High Price | Close Price | Previous Close |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 14.25 | 13.75 | 14.875 | 14.875 | 14.25 |
| Industry Sector |
|---|
| MINING |
| Top Posts |
|---|
Posted at 24/4/2024 12:12 by paulhopeful Haveapunt1: I agree, looking back recently the markets haven’t been good, But nobody knows how they will react looking forward? Market does value risk, just at a lower level currently, it’s been the same for most juniors. Think your guess is more realistic but would imagine a spike above this if there is a race to join. Hopefully PXC finds the need for speed and any new investors stay for the long term, the world needs more copper, that we do know. |
Posted at 19/1/2024 12:02 by cromw3ll Imo it seems some want to be told inside information before investing their money, that is plainly ridiculous situation.There is so much information already, I suggest re-reading the rns's go to the website and re-read the prospects etc. I think its not long term investors shouting the most but active investors who are buying and selling daily to try and accumulate more shares, which i have no problem but the de-ramping and speculation is tedious, so move on as its clear as daylight what games your playing. |
Posted at 19/1/2024 09:57 by haveapunt1 Also, what level of interest from investors? Another area the company court easily shed light on through an investor meet company or similar. There is interest and there is serious interest, yet investors are left second guessing.Economic model 99.5% complete - but it’s going to take another 3-4 months to finish that 0.5% when the commercial metrics where issues over a year ago and openly published though PR? Hopefully you see my point re the company making it up as they go along. They have had months to finish the economic plan, and it’s naive not to think doing this would give them a huge carrot to dangle in front of potential investors yet they seem to have gone to the bond market with “yeah mate we think it’s about $800 revenue”. Naive. The commercial viability should have been totally nailed before even looking at investors parting with $80mil on a company with assests to support this of less the one third. As I say, it’s either utter naivety, or incompetence - if I am wrong I apologise but this is where the company need to help investors to understand! I’d also love to question them on their plans for cost reductions as a board of directors to show they are with shareholders rather than simply raising funds to self fund their salaries |
Posted at 19/1/2024 09:47 by haveapunt1 Donald. The company can share. For example:1. How many investors are showing interest and how many are carrying out DD 2. Explanation why the company issued a two week extension to “conclude discussions” yet they missed all dates. What weren’t wrong and caused such a delay (naive board at best if they are only NOW doing DD!) 3. Options on RF being considered - non dilutive, conversion shares etc 4. Current cash runway (interims said well into 2024 yet there we are looking at a raise end of 2023!) 5. Why did the company target economic model Q4 2023 yet are now looking at some 4 months later 6. Plans it can’t vet bonds away- what are they working on as an alternative Ultimately you can’t be in advance discussions for 12 months unless certain investors pulled the plug during the period and new ones had to be attracted. The company just need to be honest rather than Issuing RNSs this week for the sake of it. All this “nothing to say” is simply rubbish. It’s about communication and courtesy to shareholder, and frankly if they have had nothing to say for the last 12 months I would be incredibly worried at what’s going on behind the scenes re progress! |
Posted at 18/1/2024 21:26 by haveapunt1 I think it’s even easier that than saucepan.In my head I’m applying simple logic again. We were told the existing facility was not being extended and needed to be rolled into a bigger facility for working capital. This RF loan expires 24 march. We are now told that the PFS is back on the table to be completed in the spring For me, it’s clear that they have known for some time bonds will not be issued for a while, maybe logic also suggests that interest has been not as good as expected without the PFS. For me this is schoolboy error number 1. They should have had all this ironed out BEFORE seeking investors. The final PFS is the carrot! Now they have understood this, the decision was made to enter a new RF facility to keep the lights on, as the intention is to complete PFS and then go back and try again in the summer (hence the new need for more working capital). My frustration is (as Trek sums up on LSE) is the manner in which the company hides news until the last minute and even now hasn’t been transparent. Just say we made an error the funders want a full economic model (the norm) so that’s what we doing. Yes price would sink but at least then investors have a clear choice based on facts. As it stands we had investors buying at 30p plus based on hype by the board. This bond issue hasn’t been something that’s come to light the last month! It’s not how it works. Everything has become second guessing which I don’t like any longer. I mean, how long can you be in advanced discussions! My guess is bonds with settlement agent, investors what more detail to be tempted, PXC have opted to finish PFS then go try again with more “meat on the bones”. I have no issue with that, but at least don’t treat holders as mugs Sold out at a heavy loss but will wait until funding now. The closer it gets to march the more likely it’s looking to drop into single digests |
Posted at 07/12/2023 15:00 by seagreen cu5htyI have been aware of that rumour for a considerable amount of time and if they can find a profitable one and raise the bonds it would hedge a rising copper price (re interest linked to the copper price) and provide revenue to reduce the interest price.The sadness is if they would do or had done an equity raise they would or would have provided interest free money to progress and advance the whole project to the next stage where issuing bonds would be less of a risk without revenue. If they then had a larger resource proven to JORC status the whole project would have legs and if big enough then they could get a strategic investor in maybe to negate the need of a debt funding all together. Plus the price would recover fairly quickly due to the number of long term investors and potential investors. I fail to find the logic of not diluting their shares holdings far from compelling the longer this fiasco continues....As an equity funded project would potentially double pdq But the board disagrees. |
Posted at 24/10/2023 12:53 by concentrate One thought, seagreen, is that Plans A, B and C who have been continuously discussed (with Plan A known to be middle eastern investors who seem quite shy to signing the final paperwork) might also have different requirements.Perhaps the Plan B investors need to see a final economic model before signing on the dotted line (whereas Plan A investors apparently did not). |
Posted at 20/10/2023 17:40 by seagreen DPPlease answer the question your response implies you simply do not know? I find your response totally uncompelling. It is irelevant what you think or imagine or what anyone else imagines? You state: "Bank financing needs a full economic model. Bond financing is more novel and needs whatever the investors require. I imagine they would want to have some sort of economic model, though the degree of detail would be much less than a bank requires." "It will need some sort of economic study, though the last metallurgy RNS gave some idea on that front, and I assume it is only going to get better." PLEASE ASK MARCUS WHAT IS EXACTLY REQUIRED BY THE POTENTIAL INVESTORS? You state: "And you keep claiming I said the permit depended on the weather. I didn't. I said the permit would be issued after we apply for it and the authorities have the opportunity to go and verify the environmental data. That requires the land to be clear of snow. So they need the summer season to do those checks." "But I don't think any funding will wait on the permit." Firstly your response clearly is weather dependent and will not be completed until the summer (that is weather in my book) PLEASE ASK MARCUS WHAT IS EXACTLY REQUIRED BY THE POTENTIAL INVESTORS? In the absence of precise simple answers all your doing is blowing PR smoke up your faithful desciples backsides who have made a few bob on trading who will not even entertain honest questions. If you want to attract new investors state some facts not your views. If in fact the investors requirements do not require a permit and do not require a full economic model or require a simple model just say it Now that would be good IR or PR not waffle Investors and potential investors deserve to know otherwise they will think you do not even know what is required to get investors to invest, which clearly you do not but the BOD must? |
Posted at 04/10/2023 16:40 by donald pond shagreen,I know we don't want to prolong this and it isn't a heated debate at all. Your comments are made in good faith. Let me say how I see it. The world has changed, both culturally and through regulation. As a result, a large proportion of investors in UK companies buy through online brokers, and do not feel comfortable phoning up board members with their questions, and do not have access to brokers notes. They do however use multiple social media channels, of which ADVFN is one. The company has always done its best to engage private investors, through early webinars and a series of lunches (for which they received criticism, as they really can't win). My role is to try to act as a conduit between those people and the board, so that I can hear their concerns and views and feed them up to the board and give clear and consistent messages back to all investors. I know that you know the board well, and are well connected to the broker community. You have access to a lot of information that is not available to others. But these people do use social media channels widely. All I am trying to do is to make sure that the smaller investor has access to the same sort of information that you would have. Give them the answers they would receive if they felt able to phone up the company and speak to a director and ask "when do you expect this result" or "what is your biggest concern"? And from a regulatory perspective, my comments have the same standing as any other communication from the company. They aim to set out the company's position without revealing anything material or inaccurate. When I rely on information provided by others I am transparent about it. As for my post reading like a travel blog, I don't take that as a criticism. It is not intended to be the equivalent of a broker's note. It is a personal account of what I saw when I travelled to Idaho. All I am trying to do is to share as faithfully as I can my experience so that those who perhaps have thought "I'd like to see that" can get a sense of the project. And a lot of that entails reporting what Ryan told me. As far as posting on other boards is concerned, I have much reduced that and do so in a polite manner. I hope we can agree to disagree on this. |
Posted at 05/9/2023 08:54 by klondykejohn Sipptrader, I would think that the Board will be looking at other potential investors, and yes, we don`t need all of the money straight away so it is wise to open up the field for more potential investors to be approached.I repeat what I have written previously. Without the permitting being in place, then investors will hold off. Without all those time lines in place and concluded, then permitting is stalled, so it is in PXC interest to finalise the production method quickly , finish the plant and machinery layout, conclude its` costings over the LoM(7-10 year production) and crunch out the numbers for mine profitability. At this point, permitting should be advanced and maybe then, potential investors will make sure that that piece of paper arrives on the Ceo desk. We know that some of the delays have been out of PXC hands, but not all. The emphasis now should be to roll up the sleeves and double down on what needs to be done to get this project back on track. Only the existing Board can do that. |
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
