The fat salaries will cost $800k, what’s happened to the other $4.2m?
Someone mentioned there were similarities here with HZM; you can add RMM, GRL, and HUM to those
Too many crooked directors on AIM |
Looking very like a sell, but remember someone bought them. |
did someone dump nearly a million shares today.not sure if it is a buy or a sell, but sells are in the ascendancy today |
"Into Q2 25" That means new cash by April else its admin |
5 June 2024
“the Company has received the first tranche of US$5 million”
14 November 2024
“it currently retains sufficient working capital to meet ongoing obligations into Q2 2025”
NIU saw a change in the PXC business model, it was in one of the RNS statements
It looks like NIU think PCX is a scam and are pulling out? The $5 million was drawn down in June has “gone”, they’ll need cash soon |
The legal agreement that NIU did sign up for doesn't appear to be worth the paper it is written on ..what NIUs game is who really knows.I think the management thought NIU were mugs but instead it is the management that now appear the mugs...with nobody seemingly doing any due diligence on either side ...but unfortunately it is the shareholders who are ultimately the mugs for believing a word this company ever says and having coughed up so much money over the years to go nowhere...oh pardon me we have some old ball mills to show for it but no funding to get to production ..what a load of old .. |
oilinvestor - I figured as much... but following someone else's work is different to getting that person to deliver it themselves. It's just a whole different situation, that I don't think NIU signed up for. |
If it becomes insolvent & goes to the wall, Ryan doesn't get to take his work home with him. That belongs to the company and will be part of the administration process. It's regarded as Ip & knowhow owned by the organisation not the author ! |
The 5 million would still say a lot though.
Agree, a full drawdown plan would be better, but 5 million (more) is a lot and parting with that kind of cash wouldn't come lightly. |
I agree with a lot of that. However, I'd not be happy to see just a release of 5m by NIU. That would be supportive, but also leave most of the uncertainty. Any way out of this that involves the NIU deal has to involve a clear statement on phasing of the remaining payments. We'll see! |
 FWIW, my take on NIU:
I still think it's in NIU's interest to have a successful relationship with PXC:
- They've committed 5 million, which is still a sizable amount.
- If they don't uphold the 75m, that would reflect negatively on their reputation.
- If NIU tried to get more shares (to takeover) then the share price would rocket anyway.
- NIU hold 18%, but it's a %age of "nothing" if PXC goes to the wall.
- Then the only other option would be to buy the company out of the administrators... which could be full of issues. For example, maybe all the important information, such as Ryan's model of where to drill could still be kept confidential. This would be a significantly different prospect for NIU to actually run the company, rather than just taking the bond interest and increase in share price if/when that started to take off.
- After all this work, I imagine the BoD wouldn't go down without a real fight. The BoD have still got something to prove and they've been in this a long time too. Salary is 1-thing, but they're really not just here for the salary.
- After coming all this way, it does make sense for NIU to continue (of course things sometimes don't make sense), but things take time. The AIM market in particular is not patient and PXC is illiquid. Maybe just a little more patience is needed.
- Also, maybe it's good that NIU are forcing PXC to run an even tighter ship.
If/when NIU commit the next 5 million, there could be a good re-rate from here. Going in with (just!) another 5m would show they're serious.
It's either going to the wall or there could be a (minimum) 10 bagger from here.
DM |
No-one who read the Viceroy research reports on Adler (agreed 5 min Google search) would ever do business with this guy |
5 minute google search was all the dd anyone needed to do on the funder My guess is that there's a binding funding agreement but that the counter party is an SPV Allows you to say and be technically correct that you have a legally binding agreement but also means that you're entirely at the discretion of the funder as to whether they provide the funding |
I think they've missed the boat on the placing Admin/d for e more likely now |
suspect we could see quite a few of the 4p buys closing at 4.5p on an intraday trade - wary of a potential 7am monday rns |
The company has a legal agreement for $80m of committed funding from NIU we are told and issued as an arrangement fee 33.88 million shares to NIU for that commitment issuable on first drawdown of $5m....If no further funds are forthcoming do we get those shares back?They have only put up 6.25% of the committed amount can we cancel all but the equivalent in what was issued...if there are no grounds in the agreement to cancel the 93.75% of those shares for failure to meet the legal terms ..which directors are at fault for being scammed?? |
Think people are a bit harsh on DP here,his job is to promote the company and see if funds can be raised to progress the mine to production.Looks like a fair project but seriously doubt its a billion dollar once in a lifetime project.i seriously doubt anyone is going to lend 80million to fund a mine that has no permission to operate but what do i know.Seems to me unless they can pull a rabbit out of the hat shareholders here are going to get one of those nasty late afternoon rns.GLA |
Donald - if PXC and NIU walk away from this...funds are obtained from another party, is there any way in which those shares given the NIU can be voided?
Or do they have 18% of the Company come what may? |
Stock 18% down on one of the highest volume days this year 188m shares in issue and almost 10m traded already...About time the nomad got a grip on the company and information flow...there is no orderly in this market.Down 78% ytd.. |
Judging by the volatility and the size of some of these buys today, I have a horrible feeling that a discounted placing is being forward sold here. |
Correct on close period , so something that the cfo has misinformed on by saying they were still in close period following the results and for a director to be considered restricted would only be the case if there was a high degree of certainty that the information that was priced sensitive would materialise in the very near term. Inside information needs to disclosed as soon as possible ..in the meantime there needs to be a record of those inside and why the information is being withheld.That is why directors are not permanently inside in terms of having conversations around the implementation of strategy.Unfortunately pxc seems to use close period and being inside on permanent basis to avoid correctly updating the market...though "they would like to say more" ..they can't ...is just nonsensical and puffy bit like the cfo. |
There are MAR rules. The idea is that if material news comes out a director shouldn't have bought (or sold) shares just before. Which is why when directors do buy shares people often say that means no news for a while. It's the stock market rules.
Closed period normally means no director trades at all in the statutory period before results. |
Register for streaming realtime charts, analysis tools, and prices.
Hot Features
Premium
