Tri-star Resources Share Discussion Threads

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 13:49

I wouldn't even bother, check their posting history, serial antagonist on ADVFN.

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 13:39

What do you mean Datait?

[datait] 04/12/2020 13:26

closing the doors by the look of it.

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 13:24

Well it's already producing it just needs remedial work, which is what the recent investment was towards, so with a bit of luck it will be up to 100% capacity by Q1 which isn't that far away.I've been adding some, I think the risk reward is balanced to our favour here and as you say this may solely be due to investors not willing to allow their cash to go into a private company.The example of this on LSE outlines one possible outcome.

[swanvesta] 04/12/2020 13:21

Or else someone with a lot of shares wants it to delist as a complete washout.

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 13:07

I suppose some people are unable to have their money locked up for potentially 12+ months.Plus there is a (IMO small) risk of the smelter still not working properly, which would definitely wipe TriStar out.

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 12:32

Perhaps, bearing in mind there's been forced sellers here, plus traders getting out for the weekend, and then of course those spooked into selling by LSE trolls.

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 12:31

Perhaps a delayed 500k sold at 1.75p?

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 12:17

Dumping at a loss you mean.I've just bought 74k more at 1.98p. There must be a bigger delayed sell at a lower price.

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 12:16

Or just traders who are dumping and moving on to the next one.

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 11:41

It's hard to work out who's selling 250k trades at 2p, who didn't have a chance to sell at 4p or 5p in recent days?Surely there are no more shorters left at 2p, and when any significant shorters clearly bought back on Wednesday?I can only conclude that it's people who literally cannot hold an unlisted share for regulatory reasons and so are forced to dump at any price.NAI

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 10:04

hTTps://t.m%20e/joinchat/HkgNOFg79n3GFQuio7fmZg

[cyberbub] 04/12/2020 09:57

You need to repost typing hTTps rather than https

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 04/12/2020 09:50

https://t.m e/joinchat/HkgNOFg79n3GFQuio7fmZg

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 03/12/2020 21:15

They held 70% of the company it's rather unlikely that they would have expected to sell down a significant % of their holding before the delist especially as its in their interests to back it with as high a holding as they can sustain.

[swanvesta] 03/12/2020 20:50

Who decides the price is fair? Especially when the last trade to refer to on AIM was at 2.5p. That's why I suggested it might be worth Odey selling down to such a level. Is the story about client accounts real or just an assumption? It seems to me rather an unlikely explanation, as I don't see why clients wouldn't buy back on their own behalf rather than be shafted this badly.

I'm presuming there are protections in law for minority shareholders, and also presuming there's no point Odey making a stink if he doesn't really need to. If I'm wrong, I've just paid for some education!

[cyberbub] 03/12/2020 20:00

I was looking through the last 12 months' RNSes and I couldn't see that Odey had officially bought any shares in that time.So presumably that means he can offer whatever he wants for the remaining 32% of the company?

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 03/12/2020 19:13

Odey have only sold a small % of their total holding that was held in client accounts that were unable to facilitate delisting equities, some providers can and others can't.If you look at the last price Odey or someone acting on their behalf paid for stock in this period that is the minimum they can bid for the stock.

[swanvesta] 03/12/2020 17:56

OK, so that's why he's been selling the price down?

[cl0ckw0rk0range] 03/12/2020 17:37

That's only really relevant if the entity that bids for the company has been buying stock, so for example if Odey decide to offer then they can't offer less than the highest price they paid over that period.

[cyberbub] 03/12/2020 17:25

Does anyone know what the 12-month rule in the Takeover Code means - does it mean that an offeror wanting to buy the company has to pay the highest price *the offeror* has paid in the last 12 months, or that *anyone* has paid in the last 12 months? Thanks.

[cyberbub] 03/12/2020 15:44

I bought a few more anyway, it looks like some people are doing the same this afternoon.

[cyberbub] 03/12/2020 15:43

As I said before, the main risk I see is whether the smelter does come into operation, or whether further technical problems emerge. You would hope that with a further $120M being thrown at it that it will be successful!I have a small niggle about whether we will be robbed of any upside, but at 2.5p the *downside* risk of this seems very very limited IMO.