Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Zareba LSE:ZBA London Ordinary Share GB00B0661N17 ORD 0.1P
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  +0.00p - - - - - - - - -
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
- - - - 0.00

Zareba (ZBA) Latest News

Real-Time news about Zareba (London Stock Exchange): 0 recent articles
More Zareba News
Zareba Takeover Rumours

Zareba (ZBA) Share Charts

1 Year Zareba Chart

1 Year Zareba Chart

1 Month Zareba Chart

1 Month Zareba Chart

Intraday Zareba Chart

Intraday Zareba Chart

Zareba (ZBA) Discussions and Chat

Zareba Forums and Chat

Date Time Title Posts
22/2/200713:13ZBA: Chart and News Summary882
20/4/200621:28zareba plc16,562
13/11/200520:56High Risk Zareba: Chart and News140

Add a New Thread

Zareba (ZBA) Most Recent Trades

No Trades
Trade Time Trade Price Trade Size Trade Value Trade Type
View all Zareba trades in real-time

Zareba (ZBA) Top Chat Posts

mufmitz: The problem I see is the delay in the new QFI becoming a profitable company. In the meanwhile the QFI share price will be supported entirely on hopes. It will be interesting to see what happens to the ZBA share price tomorrow particularly at the end of the day.
boite mobile: Paddywak1967 - 12303 - "The number of shares issued will not necessarily have any bearing on the actual share price as the value of the individual shares is a completely seperate issue. Quadrise Canada obviously put a figure on what they felt each share was worth and the finance companies who bought $32,000,000 of shares supported this valuation." Paddy either I am completely missunderstanding your comment here or you are wrong. Probably the latter but of course the number of shares issued has a bearing on the share price. If you have a company with £1,000,000 worth of net asset value and the company has only 1 share that share will be worth a figure based upon the net asset value. If the asset is in short supply someone may be prepared to pay above the NAV and if not they may pay a discount on NAV but the value will still relate to the NAV. If the same company had issued two equal shares instead of a single share their value would be half. Yes there are technical issues ref voting rights etc. but clearly the number of shares issued has to affect the price. Paddy ref the question of competition to quadrise what do you make of the post, from someone whilst you were away, who mentioned thermal fuel cells etc. Would be interested in your thoughts. BM BM
trollyman: onone2 - 22 Feb'06 - 12:00 - 11596 of 11601 my outlook is zba share price to open at pre suspension price with a rentry with substancial placeing,of wich will hold the share price back until they advance to aquiring contracts? then consolidation, to atract the big players, +++++++++++++++++ Excellent post and yes substancial placing will hold the price back for at least 12 months minimum and then it's down to the management, who so far have lied and promised but delivered nothing. TROLLY
onone2: my outlook is zba share price to open at pre suspension price with a rentry with substancial placeing,of wich will hold the share price back until they advance to aquiring contracts? then consolidation, to atract the big players,
paddywak1967: The following is definitely worth a look. When Nautical Petroleum(owned by Masefield and involved in heavy oil production in the north sea) reversed into Bullion resources in March 05 their shares were suspended at 6.25p following a rapid 33% rise. When they relisted they quickly rose to 11p and last week had risen to 15.5p. Note that there was no share price dilution whatsoever and no fundraising as the company had financial support from Masefield. They issued shares worth almost £21,000,000 as part of the deal. Now I think that the potential for Quadrise is much much greater than that of Nautical who are primarily a heavy oil exploration company. As a result I believe that the shareprice for ZBA will rise substantially higher than that of Nautical when they relist. The Sad Saga Of Bullion Resources Ends And A Bright Future Opens As Nautical Petroleum. It has taken a while, but the long suffering shareholders in Bullion Resources can look their bank managers in the face once again. Credit has to be given to Malcolm Burne of Golden Prospect who was determined not to take a loss on his holding and he was supported by Colin Bird of Lion Mining and Jubilee Platinum. Without wanting to dwell too much on the past, Bullion Resources' shares performed badly after the IPO in 2002. An independent report by Lion Mining the following year concluded tht the South African assets of the company were not economically viable and the South African mining regulators criticised the Competent Person's Report on which the listing was based. In due course four of the directors resigned and their shares were acquired by Golden Prospect. Litigation again the Competent Person is still under advice and the Nomad - our old friends at Grant Thornton - was replaced. In October 2004 Bullion Resources sold its assets, such as they were, and underwent a restructuring to become a cash shell. As part of the restructuring the company raised £625,000 through a non-brokered placing and the directors evaluated a number of deals to make the best use of its listing and funds. The decision in the end was to carry out a reverse takeover of a company called Nautical Holdings by issuing shares to a value of £20.93 million. The name is going to be changed to Nautical Petroleum and the shares started trading again today, once the deal had been announced. Bullion Resources shares had been suspended at 6.25p after a quick advance in the share price a few weeks ago and they started trading again today at 10.5p, a rise of 68 per cent. Note to Phil the Spin and the nomads and brokers involved with his companies, the suspension of Bullion Resources was requested after the shares had risen by 30 per cent, not thirteen fold as in the case of White Nile. Nautical Holdings is a subsidiary of Masefield Energy Holdings which was created last year to hold the non-trading , asset based business interests of the Masefield Group. The Group also has an energy trading company, Masefield AG, which is involved in global trading of crude oil and refined products in major oil trading hubs and its clientele includes most of the participants in the global crude oil, gas and refined products markets. As a result of this business it has been able to identify and secure assets and interests which benefit from synergies with energy trading, while offering intrinsic viability and competitive advantage through application of oil process technology. This is an important point as Masefield Energy has identified and acquired heavy oil reserves in the North Sea as a prime supply source for the downstream processed fuel business. The two licences are contiguous and are situated on the East Shetland Platform in the vicinity of the well-documented Bressay and 9/3 heavy oil discoveries. Key to this whole operation was the acquisition by Masefield Energy of specialised heavy crude oil production processing equipment designed and supplied by Halliburton for the Extended Well Test programme undertaken successfully on the Mariner oil field by Texaco in 1997. Nautical Holdings has a 75 per cent interests in the licences and full ownership of the specialised oil production process equipment. The aim of the company is to lead a new phase in the development of known heavy oil reserves in the North Sea by applying advanced oil recovery technology, according to Ian Williams who will take over as chairman of Nautical Petroleum following the change of name. Mr Williams spent over 27 yrs with Royal Dutch/Shell Group before joining Masefield and ended up as Head of Strategy and Consultancy (Downstream) at Shell International Petroleum Company in London. He knows a bit about oil as does the proposed CEO, Stephen Jenkins who has 20 years technical and management experience in exploration and production world-wide with a range of oil and gas companies behind him.. The future of the business is therefore in experienced hands and Minesite can now hand over to to follow it. The past can now be forgotten, but it was a salutary experience for London's junior mining sector. Hopefully the AIM regulators will take on board the fact that mining companies are not the same as widget manufacturers , food processors or transport companies. Advisers have to have more than a working knowledge of mining and be able to assess reports from Independent Consultants with competence. Only then will investors be confident that another Bullion Resources cannot slip through the gate.
hotfinance14: It states the ZBA share price went up 80% after an acquisition...i assume this is the Namibian mine company.
stuart14: Hi Paddy. It really does depend on how many new shares are issued. With 203 million ZBA shares currently "out there" we are valued at 1.75p per share, giving us a market cap of £3.5million. If they issue another say 200 BILLION then the dilution will meam i doubt we'll see any rise. Check out Zari and their RTO with Genesis. Genesis was valued at £16 million, so they issued enough shares to keep the share price were it left off, but to increase the market cap accordingly. So if QIL comes back to the market with cash for growth of say £35million I'd expect them to issue 10x more new shares to equal out the market cap / share price ratio. I think this RTO is great news for ZBA and the future now has some direction but until we know what happens next it is all guess work. My guess is that we will list back at the same price we left off and with news flow and impending deals the price will rise accordingly
katie price: REEFTON Mining's ambitions to mine uranium in Namibia have been dealt a critical blow: the Ministry of Mines and Energy turned down Reefton's exploration application for nuclear fuels, sending its shares plummeting on the London and Australian Stock Exchanges by nearly 34 per cent. The so-called junior mining company, which also holds several Exclusive Prospecting Licences (EPLs) for diamonds and heavy mineral sands on the Skeleton Coast, this morning issued a curt announcement that its application to have nuclear fuels included in its Erongo Pyro-Metallic Project had been rejected. SHARES PLUMMET Its shares, listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (LSE AIM), took a sharp dive of 33,73 per cent immediately after the announcement. Reefton still holds, via its Black Mountain Mining (Pty) Ltd, an EPL for the area for base and rare minerals. Reefton Mining's chairman Bradley Moore was reported in Australian media as saying the company had written to the Namibian Mining Commissioner requesting reasons for the rejection of its Erongo application. Moore stuck to his guns regarding the geology, repeating their claim that the area showed four radioactive anomalies that returned significant readings of up to 94 320 counts per minute "...indicating the presence of uranium-bearing mineralisation." This was more than 10 times as high as readings obtained by any other exploration company in the same area, raising more concerns over the bona fides of the mining outfit. Mining Commissioner Erasmus Shivolo yesterday declined to discuss the reasons for the rejection, saying that such information was only to be shared with Reefton. It was, however, reliably learnt that Reefton had in fact over-stepped the line by violating several technical aspects of the Minerals (Mining and Prospecting) Act of 1992. Ironically, it was this very behaviour - by announcing a major uranium find before it had even obtained permission to commercially prospect for it - that had initially seen its share price treble in as many days. Reefton Mining NL's share price had been in a slow decline since late May, when its "uranium strike" on the farm Hakskeen, south-west of Usakos, was being questioned by the local mining industry. At their highest point, Reefton shares were trading at US$0,27 per share. The latest fall in share price saw its shares traded at USD $0,055, or 5,5 cents per share. This is in sharp contrast to its announcement on March 18 of "a major uranium anomaly", after which its share price shot through the roof. The Namibian reported on June 23 that Reefton's alleged uranium find might well have been misrepresented to investors after it emerged that the company had ignored old reports dating to the 1980s, which showed there was in fact no uranium at Hakskeen. In reports compiled in the early 1980s, two other but now defunct uranium exploration companies reported that they had drilled the suspected deposits extensively. The results were totally negative, with one report to the former Atomic Energy council stating that the surrounding granite rocks in fact emitted more radiation than the suspected ore body. This newspaper had also earlier reported that Reefton's uranium 'find' might be ascribed to poor geology, as the area of Hakskeen was infamous for displaying a false radioactive signal related to the presence of potassium and thorium in the area. Both reports were initially slammed by Reefton's geologist and technical director Gary Hemming, who suggested that this newspaper should rather not comment on specialised geology but leave such assessments "to the experts". Reefton continues to hold four EPLs over some 120 kilometres of the Skeleton Coast, which include prospecting for diamonds and heavy minerals. Work at the Skeleton Coast claims has, however, stood still for some time now, as the company reportedly was refurbishing its plant and waiting for the renewal of its licenses at the end of last month. Mining Commissioner Shivolo yesterday conceded that rigorous reporting on the mining industry in Namibia "would help keep it honest". Katie
boite mobile: Leo - The company has already done something positive. The Namibia Diamond deal to my way of thinking has been much undervalued as it has the potential to produce a fairly quick profit of £80 to £120k at its current level. If Zba get a further 15% of the Diamond company the profits will increase proportionately. I also expect ZBA to issue news of at least one or two more similar sized deals before the end of the year. If this is the case the co's earnings could be equal to current value of cash in the bank. Many Co's are valued on earnings 10 to 15 to 1. Even on a ratio of a very modest 5 to 1 the share price could easily jump to double figures within a year. With regards to MM's and the sometimes gigantic spreads which remove all incentive to both buy and sell stock I can think of one solution to ease situation. However my suggestion could also create additional problems I have overlooked in my ignorance. The big spreads seem to occur due to the small amounts involved and the very small figures we are dealing with in terms of price per share. If the Company did a 10 for 1 share exchange so that the basic share price was 10p not 1p the shares would be in more manageable chunks and a profit of 10% to the MM's on a 10P unit seems more appealing than a 10% of 1p albeit that the average number of shares per deal would also drop. I just think that the MM's would also have much greater difficulty in buying a share from us at say 8p while trying to sell us the same share at 12p. This last aspect of my plan is the most likely point to help reduce the spread the MM's ask, but as I say there are probably all sorts of reasons why the rebasing of the shares would be impracticable. What does anyone else think. Regards an AGM yes every company has to have one but the first one does not have to be exactly 365 days for a companies launch, and as a 1% shareholder I have heard nothing I don't expect an AGM to take place in the immediate future. In any event what is the AGM going to say. Apart form the companies most recent accounts they are only going to give a general overview as to the current state of play vis a vis possible investment target companies sectors etc. In other words what has already been reported in several phone conversations between board members and investor/posters here or on iii. The board cannot, as I understand quoted company procedures say anything to a select number of people which has greater bearing on the co's profits or share price without issuing an RNS. I recon ZBA will issue RNS's as soon as they can anyway imminent AGM due or not. Just my opinion and I would welcome comments from anyone who knows exactly what co law regarding these topics is. We can all speculate but knowledge is King. Have a good weekend all BM
boite mobile: Forgot to mention I would love to be wrong about the short term ZBA share price, and instead see it go back up to 2.5p+ BM
Zareba share price data is direct from the London Stock Exchange
Your Recent History
Gulf Keyst..
FTSE 100
UK Sterlin..
Stocks you've viewed will appear in this box, letting you easily return to quotes you've seen previously.

Register now to create your own custom streaming stock watchlist.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P:42 V: D:20180224 22:17:07