Tiger Royalties And Inve... Share Discussion Threads

[skyship] 13/7/2007 08:42

NAV = 7.1p with AST @ 21.5p. Each 1p on AST adds 0.14p to our NAV.

Kombimatec: AST holding currently valued @ £5.825m. We hold 27m AST having sold 2m @ 18.0p back in April. Personally I'm hoping we top-slice a few more at these levels.

[kombimatec] 13/7/2007 08:29

Market cap GBP 7.9m, AST holding alone worth GBP 6.2m

[ntv] 12/7/2007 17:46

skyship
why don't you contact BR or CB?
a contact number was on a recent RNS and put your q's to them direct

[ntv] 12/7/2007 17:42

i reckon it is closer to 7p as the warrants add another £41k
i happy with that
the real movement in ast will come when logging is completed earlier nxt week

[skyship] 12/7/2007 14:42

Looks to me as though at 13.16 today we've had 665k buys v. 25k sales. Why the hell wasn't Bruce Rowan buying those in. If he fails to sell some AST today too, then one has to assume he gets up late.....or is over in Oz and no-one delegated to watch the ship........

[skyship] 12/7/2007 11:27

AST particularly strong again today - actually touched 20.25p Bid a few moments ago. Hopefully we will see Tiger selling a few AST into the strength. AST off the top now, but still @ 19p the Tiger NAV has advanced to an all-time high of 6.74p, thanks also to a small contribution from today's rise in African Eagle (AFE).

[ntv] 12/7/2007 00:04

if tiger is not updating it's website you can report it to the LSE

[zedder] 11/7/2007 22:26

I'll second all of those SKYSHIP. Perhaps someone can ask TIR to update their bloddy website as well, so us shareholders can contact those whose wages we pay!

[skyship] 10/7/2007 11:59

TOPVEST - Can you tell us

a). whether at the rear of the Annual Report the Board is once again seeking approval for the share buyback Scheme; also

b). what did Bruce Rowan pay himself last year (2004-£125,000; 2005-£175,000)

NTV - Herewith a list of possible questions & gripes!

1. Listed in the Tiger portfolio is a holding valued at £40k and described merely as MIT Ventures Corp. Loan Note. Could you please tell us something about this investment, in particular whether we earn any interest, whether there is any capital upside and when it is due for repayment?

2. It was sad to see that you sold the holding in Formation Capital just days before they doubled. Could you tell us the thinking behind the sale at that time – clearly we didn't need the cash for any alternative investment....

3. A very brief study of the TIGER portfolio shows a bundle of frankly rather poorly performing mining companies, saved wholly by the holding in Franconia. Fortunately the overall performance of the portfolio relies on the two major investments in the junior oil & gas exploration sector – together accounting for over two-thirds of our non-cash portfolio as at end May. In spite of this fact your Chairman's Statement of 26th June makes absolutely zero mention of OIL. Could you tell us something as to your thoughts in that area?

4. It appears that much of the period 2005-2007 has been relatively inactive from the point of view of portfolio movement. Yet Admin expenses consumed 400k in 2005 and a rather profligate 493k in 2006. Can you account for the rise in this figure and give us some reassurance as to how this annual depletion can be capped.

5. Over the past three years Cash at Bank has accounted for sequentially 41%, 47% and now 46% of shareholder funds. In a time of low interest rates and a booming mining sector it has hardly been a good time to be sitting on cash. As the Board bizarrely seems devoid of investment ideas, would it not be right to return the cash to shareholders either through a capital distribution or a tender offer for stock somewhere midway between the current share price and the current NAV. A 50% tender @ 4.5p might be appropriate perhaps.

6. At the last AGM shareholders approved the share buyback scheme, a worthwhile move intended to more closely align the share price to its underlying net asset value. Regretably the Board has seemed reluctant to pursue the Scheme, so the share price languishes at a 45% NAV discount. Could you please explain the reluctance to fulfil shareholders' wishes, bearing in mind that to state there was no worthwhile stock available to buy is wholly incorrect unless the Market is tested to higher levels.

[skyship] 09/7/2007 16:47

I see someone sold 1.5m AST @ 17p today - I wonder if that will turn out to have been us - certainly hope so as it surely must be right to reduce the over-reliance on the one stock.

[skyship] 09/7/2007 16:17

NTV - That would be great if you could attend. I'll think up a few questions, though I suspect they won't differ from your own...

Haven't had my accounts yet as I too am in nominees, so thanks for that Topvest, I've phoned for a copy today (0207-581-4477).

With AST up again today the undiluted NAV is now back up to the end May level of 6.42p, in spite of a 25% fall in TYM after the relisting.

With the 44% discount to NAV it really is bizarre that the Company isn't continuing with the authorised buyback programme - Bruce Rowan appears to be doing very little else to justify his salary, so why not do what we voted for him to do!#~?

[ntv] 08/7/2007 18:08

i like to hold mine in my nominee a/c and in more than one a/c
that way no body knows how many you hold ;-))

[topvest] 08/7/2007 17:37

Had mine at least a week ago; they are on the web-site as well.

[ntv] 08/7/2007 16:03

skyship
i will try to attend
have you had the full accounts yet?

[skyship] 07/7/2007 17:23

CAN ANYONE MAKE THE CENTRAL LONDON AGM ON 1ST AUGUST

Not much chance for me as I live down here in SW France; however if someone plans to attend then I would like to agree a few questions for the Board......I feel sure we would all have a few.

[skyship] 06/7/2007 16:31

Just sold some AST @ 15.59p!! Valuing AST @ 15.5p the TIR NAV is now back up to 6.25p...

[skyship] 06/7/2007 12:16

Yes.....£540,000 addition to the 30th June NAV - c.0.25p/share

[zedder] 06/7/2007 10:01

AST bouncing back from recent low very quickly.

[johndee] 04/7/2007 11:37

about 150,000 more pounds I suppose...............

[zedder] 04/7/2007 11:15

The 5.1m PAF held are finally worth something again today. Surprised we ticked down rather than up!

[curt3] 30/6/2007 11:12

comparison of finals with interims shows disposal of all of Alamos Gold and Formation Capital Corp and half (312500 shares) of Franconia Mins (TSE)holding for total proceeds of £ 984208. Given that Alamos + Formation were valued at £770511 in interims, which they may not have realised on disposal, it indicates that TIR sold the Franconia for less than £1 per share. Franconia are now nearer £2 per share !! Why do we have to work this out for ourselves ? and not have it clearly shown in the Report ? With £4M sitting unused in the bank why sell a share that is clearly storming ahead ? I just dont get their investment strategy during a sustained period of mining / minerals growth to be sitting with c40% of assets in cash. Holding in some of their investments is miniscule e.g. Ridge. If they believed in that investment why not bulk it up especially when it was cheap cheap and Merrill Lynch were getting at 30p (now £1.45). Also could Colin Bird not have suggested investment in Jubillee Platinum which he knows intimately ? TIR share price was over 4p a year ago and Im sorry to say that 2006 was a year of passive inactivity and lost oppertunity where the only idea was to buy back its own shares. Definitely one for widows and orphans !

[zedder] 29/6/2007 16:00

This message was created automatically by mail delivery software.

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of
its recipients. The following addresses failed:

[e-mail]

[skyship] 28/6/2007 13:55

zedder - I had the same problem in the past with the TIR co. email address, so you might try the co. sec's email:

[e-mail]

I believe the answer on the warrant situation is that they were conditional warrants only exercisable if the share price hadn't passed a target level. The share price did in fact close the y/e well in excess of the target level, so they lapsed without value.

[utwiq] 28/6/2007 11:43

topvest - if the company has stood still for a few years then to that extent it has failed. It is a resource sector investment company (less tax efficient than an investment trust, but it can focus more closely on particular investments, which may or may not be good) and yet it hasn't delivered in the midst of a bull market. I don't know how far back you are going when you say that "it has done well for all so far", but if you mean that it did well for several years before the last few years then that really isn't good enough, especially as many shareholders will only have experienced the last few years. (Incidentally, my advfn screen above shows the share price as 2.8p or so in Jan 2005, and it is now 3.65p or so. Which means 30% improvement over 2.5yrs. Quite poor indeed in this market. NAV may have improved more rapidly. But still... that is only 9% per annum.) So it is more than frustrating I think, it is unimpressive.

Again, to clarify, I do not hold this. I was interested, and might be again if I saw evidence of an active investment strategy (or if the discount became absurd).