You've got to love a telegram group. |
All over Telegram, telling us everything is fine. Lol |
I agree all your points that everything in the PFS was maxed out . However to be fair i believe they came out at a much lower production cost than the earlier $3.6 in the economic model ..i think was at least a buck lower from memory ..the CFO mentioned it in the interview post interims , what a low cost producer they will be...but he said a lot didn't he..a $b company , dividends , producing mid next year, NUI good for the money ...he said a lot!! |
Still no sign of Donald? Where on earth is he? |
They've not the money and the funding agreement is backed with an SPV covenant would be my guess Totally legged |
 The other concerning thing is the level of insiders. Categorically undeniable there are some that are trading in advance of news being released. Someone always knows. Like the price action over the last few days, makes you sick.
They are selling, once it drops, I bet they buying back, to lower the average.
Many things from the PFS. Firstly it's not compliant, it's one of the conditions of the bonds funding which no one knew, the discounted rate used of 7.5% is so low to make the project seem somewhat ok! It's a ridiculous situation, handled awfully.
So another few months and if not sorted there will be a placing, unforgiveable.
Also when there are big holders sat on 6 figure losses, and say doesn't matter, resigned to losing everything, I'm sorry but if you can lose 6 figures, and not be too fussed, unfortunately not everyone is in the same boat. It's a tough AIM market, if this went to alot lot lower, I would not be surprised. Look at CHAR would never ever think it's dropping to 2p. Just furious with the whole situation. |
My guess would be the Nomad has forced the company to make this update..overdue ...and questions what the Nomad was doing when they put this funding i place and announced it to the market ..if there is no surety of the funding and the timetable was not binding they should have told shareholders befor asking them to vote on the share issue t not drip feed the flakiness of it all months later. |
Wonder if NIU still holds all those 33.88m shares as far as i am aware there was no embargo on selling for any period. Naturally they should inform if they make sales or purchases breaching a % barrier but I'm not sure they understand their ongoing obligations very well and judging by some or the articles on the principal of NIU it doesn't appear that regulations etc bother them that much. There certainly has been a motivated seller over the past few days seeing the price fall sharply before the company decided it better cobble together something...and the best they can do leaves those still hoping all was OK following the CFO interview realising he was talking a load of old bllx ...again. So down they come further. |
What an utter shambles this has turned out to be. BoD talked a good game 3 years ago and have said nothing for the past 2 years. Bunch of cowards. Private within 6 months? |
Kooba - it’s an interminable mess right now, for sure. |
Bumpa obviously not just the warrants that get issued as further drawdowns were made..they did get a chunk of free shares just for the first $5m of the subscription agreement."...subject to the Initial Drawdown being received, the Company has agreed to pay the Bonds Investor an arrangement fee by way of an issue of 33.88 million new ordinary shares of no par value in the Company"This was questioned at the time by me and others that they got such a big percentage of the company just on initial drawdown...and what if's...Shareholder HoldingNIU Invest SE 18.02%So our largest and most influential shareholder is also the largest creditor and party to a legal subscription agreement that they say they want to change now...I am confused what was agreed with the company because they certain didn't say that the funding was conditional of a compliant PFS or could be changed at any point that the bondholder felt like leaving the company flailing around with no idea on how they progress....Must have been a lot in the small print not shared when we were asked to vote on issuing those shares to the bond investor. |
Feasibility studies are paper analyses undertaken by people paid by the company which benefits from the results - a conflict of interest. Constructing and operating a mine profitably while obeying all the environmental regulations etc is something else altogether. HZM is a case in point. A total disaster from start to finish. |
It's a curious RNS which creates a lot more questions.
Can IR clear up?
My reading between the lines is NIU are still contractually committed but have questioned the timing of drawdowns and perhaps this may cause a delay hence the reference other funding? |
There were no surprises at all with the PFS apart from how long it took to produce and the fact that it seems to have been a condition to drawing funding we were not told about ..its compliance in using used plant prices could be an issue but the company was at least up front in terms of how they planned on buying much of the plant , so no surprises there either..the numbers were flattered by the second hand capital prices being used..but apart from that there should be no specific disappointment at that point if NIU had done any rudimentary homework.The funding for drilling the adit to access those sulphides they like to talk about was to be done over winter and the cost i believe was given as less than $3m and could easily be funded out of the "committed" $80m...of course the CFO also said he thought the cost of development would come in less than the PFS figure as they filled in more gaps on cost of acquiring plant which would give more room.Its difficult to know what NIUs issue is but i reckon it is because the don't and never did have the funds available and were bluffing it hoping to find secondary buyers for the bonds they committed to. That hasn't happened and the rest is trying to put a narrative around the mess they have made of getting into bed with such an outfit...seems the Chair introduced them.We might want to check who earnt big fees in pulling this in. |
If you google trout unlimited empire mine there is a write up of the empire project and its progress.Of course what the article says might well be wrong but who knows.GLA |
kaos: You’re assuming the “assets” have substantial value, there’s no evidence (in the form of bids or funding proposals) that they do. Everything you hear about the project is from the company ramping its value. There’s bound to be an alternative perspective. |
Basically there is a major issue with NIU, and they are just biding their time hoping it will sort itself out. Everything at standstill again with no funding. When they say contractually oblige it means nothing.
IMO This will continue to trickle down to pennies as we get closer to q2, only 4-5months away.
What if NIU were sold a fantastic story, however when the PFS came out, they were not happy. So many possibilities, don't even want to think about it. And they keep and saying contractually, meaning, double speak for ending up in the courts. PXC is now worse off than BEFORE funding, as NIU are in the room! |
at this share price level a buy out proposal is the most rational thing for niu. peanuts and off they go - even if they have no money. pay back spiral debt facility and flip the assets.
strange that the riverfort or whoever has given the loan did not trigger... this is what intrigues me... bod was telling the truth... good relationships... i did not believe it... but was true
superb real life novel .... |
other properties which are in less advanced stages of development and need more capital as far as i understand - should now get money......
my one brain cell can not process it - again |
It’s clearly an excuse to cover for the fact that their main project has a funding deficit, which needs addressing with alternative sources. Can anyone name any microcap, single-project, mining developer which has attracted debt funding equal to more than their mkt cap? Why would anyone lend on those conditions? There’s no security whatsoever. This applies to EML as well, amongst others. |
The idea that the company has a terrific asset they can move to strong cashflows next year after years and years of prep work but wants to borrow more money to try to start prepping other far earlier stage assets using more expensive borrowed money before they get this first one started or even a timeline to do that seems like a very stupid idea. It also does not fit their model of pursuing those opportunities using the cashflow from Empire.They struggle to get a single asset to a position to exploit it ..last thing they need is to be spending $ms more on others. |
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
Hot Features
Premium
