Thor Energy Share Discussion Threads

[abrahe00] 25/6/2018 07:50

Spot on Noirua. Mick needs to tie up a deal soon. He has been stringing investors along for over six years on Molyhill and it's about time he delivered.

E.

[noirua] 23/6/2018 13:53

"share price doesn't reflect performance to date", says Thor. Well, it does reflect the performance to date as shareholders are looking for a joint venture agreement and not gradual advancement of projects with no pay day insight.
The company points to a light at the end of the tunnel but a gorilla has escaped and a flash light has gone missing.

[paleje] 21/6/2018 14:49

OT but relevant same school as THR...PJ, MTR, Gervais Heddle etc....they peaked at 3p in Jan then collapsed when a major walked away. They were vilified, called scam, scum, all the usual stuff...but today up over 60%. Nobody calling them names now:)

Tide can turn very quickly.

[paleje] 21/6/2018 14:38

Yep it's shoddy stuff but lots of people read it.

We have to make our own decisions at the end of the day but management have to help by providing accurate and honest data. Mick's letter was a nudge and a wink but that's all, it didn't even say the 4p 4-month-ago price had been fair value, it only said that a 50% devaluation was not caused by the news releases. Careful wording.

I think we're undervalued now but 4p was frothy. Shares overshoot and undershoot all the time. Hopefully the upgrade we're promised and the additional information from work and discussions which have been going on in the background will make 4p seem an undervaluation. A jv would be great because of third party validation.

But we need facts not winks, nudges and nuances.

Remember MTR invested £300k at 3p in Jan and went on to pay higher in open market.

[lenses] 21/6/2018 10:58

Is this unattributed 'broker' faked up by T 'lose'-ifrith though? I wonder!!!

All the hallmarks. Same old, same old hackneyed conclusion come to on those who run AIM cos that is trotted out at share price every day. Granted sometimes valid, but mostly not.

AS ever for those actually prepared to risk their own hard earned, best DYOR.

L.

[abrahe00] 21/6/2018 09:58

Do you have a link to that article?

[paleje] 21/6/2018 09:41

Don't think ASX low vol counts for much, but an item on Shareprophets website flagged by LSE poster jonjo stating that a broker has emailed clients impugning THR bonafides has spooked some this end. We don't need that sort of mischief from TW.

The sooner Mick issues some proper factual data the better.

[abrahe00] 20/6/2018 15:42

So... An 18% increase on ASX doesn't warrant any rise on AIM... This is frustratingly ridiculous! Or, is it the other way round!? ?

[jarega85] 20/6/2018 08:07

AX share price is at .45 Dollars and gained 18% yesterday which is equivalent to 2.5p for us so we have some catching up to do!

[paleje] 19/6/2018 16:10

Mixing $ with £, my fault for not stating. The $40m capital translates to £30m which should be in the calculation, ie discounted future cashflows minus outflows including capital. But not the cost of getting the capital which would be the crucial structuring part MB refers to in his letter.

I can see your point abrahe00, about flogging off PM but I'd rather see a deal on Moly without going down that route. With Moly in place we'll get a better deal for PM.

Juniors at the mo are being valued harshly (what us pi's should be looking at) at around a third of their NPV's so perhaps £15-20m for Moly maybe a bit more depending on the deal.

That still seems attractive to me with PM and Kapunda in for free. Of course it makes a lot of assumptions and we'll be better informed when we see the DFS.

And yes, for gods sake don't issue any more letters:)

edit: sorry NAV should be NPV

[abrahe00] 19/6/2018 14:52

Yes... But, if we need to raise $40m to build a production facility without a JV partner, that pretty much clears out the cupboard!

That's why I think Mick is better off selling PM to a major miner for c. $10-$15m and focus resources at Molyhill.

I see Mick's open letter to shareholders has had the desired effect... Down another 6%! :o/

[paleje] 19/6/2018 14:02

Good advice.

Do the sums Knowing, look back at 2015 NPV Molihil which was ~38m then add a bit for rising tungsten, extra mine life and cost savings, current base case NPV could be 45-50m and that's without underground or Bonya. That's only 1 project.

Board say there's nothing wrong with the DFS and it's going to match expectations (even if timeline does not). So fair to conclude we're undervalued and then some based on our current mcap of ~13m.

[abrahe00] 19/6/2018 12:28

Far be it from me to dispense investment advice, but if you truly believe that these will go back to 4-5p, then buying now, even if they may drop another 0.5p should be immaterial.

People that try to buy at the absolute bottom and sell at the maximum peak often miss the boat because of their greed. And those who claim to do it regularly, are liars! ;o)

AIMHO...

[knowing] 19/6/2018 11:26

Tempting fate - Has the selling stopped. Time to Buy?

[abrahe00] 19/6/2018 10:17

Good to see you on here Plasbryn. I remember you from the old days... Was it Scotty Group?

[paleje] 19/6/2018 09:51

Plasbryn, imo quite a bit initially and the so called ring-fence rules need to change, lot of money tied up, some lost. Beaufort's illegal identity 'cloaking' service whereby insiders could trade anonymously without notifying probably had an effect too. For a while.

[5chipper] 19/6/2018 09:21

Can sell quite a few above bid... tempted to top up

[abrahe00] 19/6/2018 08:27

I think one of the reasons for the lack of interest in PM is the relatively short mine life. At 7 years, it is half the average life one might expect from a Tungsten mine.

The new licence deal should help this and hopefully the DFS will highlight the extended life of this property.

AIMHO... DYOR...

E.

[plasybryn] 19/6/2018 08:12

Interesting he raises the Beaufort impact. I wonder how much impact that is having across the Sector? Outcome of PWC work in September I believe.

[paleje] 18/6/2018 23:52

I think the message in the letter isn’t just for shareholders, it’s also for interested parties who might be looking for opportunistic deals on the cheap. Mick hasn’t got experience building and running a mine but he does have an eye for a decent deal.

[oakville] 18/6/2018 15:04

Much ado about nothing

[abrahe00] 18/6/2018 14:35

The only bits of interest were the "Latest Position" and even they were vague!

MB can bleat on all he likes about how unfair the stock market is to THR and that the valuation does not reflect their assets or project values. Whereas, in reality, it's his job to address that problem. This is something that he has failed to do for years, so questions have to be raised about his ability to run this company. Does he not realise that the $40m+ cost of building an operational capability is what is holding the share price back? Until such times that he has a mining major beside him, he will struggle to sell THR to investors. He needs to find a major partner for PM or listen to reasonable offers for the asset.

The absence of a revised date for the DFS is also disappointing.

AIMHO...