Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

remlif's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. As a longer term holder with belief in the graphene story, I would like to think that one of the companies trialing their quota of free graphene from Talga, has stepped up and asked for a share of the Company both to guarantee their future supply and put the squeeze on competitors. Sure, this would dilute the rest of us but that is going to happen anyway, On the plus side, it could establish Talga as an investment grade stock having much greater appeal to institutions
  2. Shouldn't be too difficult to calculate Grigor's sales as a proportion of total sales during that period. I would guess that Grigor would have been the dominant seller. If so, then Talga would be a screaming BUY while Grigor is still unloading
  3. Very true nipper, List seems mostly to be research organisations and Unis. It looks like Talga got an invite because of their pilot plant in Germany which they call a DEMONSTRATION PLANT. Every Graphene academic in Europe will be lining up to have a look. No wonder Talga was piped aboard.
  4. remlif


    Although I've sold out of LNG, I've been pondering what has moved a couple of US hedge funds to make significant investment in LNG with such urgent and reckless abandon. Last night, the penny dropped. It may not be a share in LNG that they want. There could be another prize and their influence on LPG's share register is simply to buy a seat at the table to "assist" the LPG Directors with their decision makong as they progress towards a final investment decision (FID) around the end of the year. Let me set the background. Magnolia LNG LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Liquified Natural Gas Ltd and hence LNG Directors are currently calling all the shots. Before these directors make the FID they need to lock in the required $2.2billion of construction costs. This is a big ask for a small company. They are proposing to service these cash requirements with a mix of equity and debt. Stonepeak (a US infrastructure fund) are slated to provide $660M of new equity and for this they will receive a 48% share in Magnolia LNG LLC (not LNG). LNG's share in Magnolia will drop from 100% to 52%. BNB Paribas have been appointed financial advisor and debt arranger to cover the rest of the $2.2b required. All this is public knowledge. What follows is my conjecture. The hedge funds obviouslly view this project favourably and believe that the eventual rewards outweigh justify the risks. They want a piece of the action. They may indeed simply be taking a stake in LNG, but I think it more likely that their interest is in Magnolia LNG and that their share raid on LNG is simply to buy a spot at the table with the LNG Directors up until the Final Investment Decision is made towards the end of the year. What they will be asking for: I do not know. What share holding in LNG they will require in order to get it: I do not know. I suggest that their share buying will cease when they believe they have sufficient clout and after they get their way or are rebuffed. At this point, they will have no further use for their shareholding and would be possible sellers. If all this conjecture of mine has some substance, then there will at sometime between now and the end of the year a severe drop in the share price of LNG. Re-reading the brokers reports on the LNG website, it would seem that the current intrinsic value of LNG should be around $1 a share Lastly, can I say that I have no expertise in merchant banking or Hedge fund strategies. I am just a simple investor looking after my retirement monies.
  5. remlif


    Hi arty, Thanks for the advice. You're right. Let your winners run and cull your losses! But I've sold out completely now for a gain of $200k. I'm continually reminded of my experience a few years ago with the ticketing company ERG where I watched a $30k investment grow to $500k and then went overseas on long service leave. By the time I got back it had mostly gone and I ended up selling them at a loss. Never again. Comparing LNG with Chenier which is the only real SP comparison. It took them 5 years to become an 8 bagger. LNG has done it in 6 months. Something doesn't add up. I've already broken all my SMSF investment rules and with 30th June approaching I only had 2 weeks to repair the damage. I wish all of you every success with LNG. It has been good to me.
  6. remlif


    Having similar troubles myself frodo, I sold out half my stake on Friday at $1.58. Perhaps the same shares that you bought? LNG had suddenly become the largest single component of my SMSF and that was a danger signal to me. I reasoned that Baupost do NOT usually look to become the dominant share holder in any one investment and sooner or later will reach their intended level of investment in LNG. When that time comes and they withdraw from the market, LNG share price could drop like a stone and perhaps even halve. I got nervous. In fact I'm still nervous. Perhaps more nervous than I am greedy.
  7. remlif


    I believe your are right veeone Something is afoot. I suspect this relentless buying is coming from the US. Was watching this closely yesterday debating whether to sell and run, and noticed that when the buying pause for a while mid afternoon, that the price quickly fell back, but the buyer (s) returned with renewed aggression towards the close. There are a couple of (paid for) analysts reports buried in their web site that are well worth reading. In particular, the one by Foster Stock broking makes a comparison with Cheniere Energy Inc share price movement over the last 5 years. They point out that: 1. Chenier and LNG are the only 2 listed "pure plays" among 20 or so companies in the development queue with Chenier being well ahead of the pack and commencing production in 2015 2. Chenier share price has risen 800% over the 5 years to date 3. LNG is about 2-3 years behind Chenier on its route to production If you are a holder or an intending holder, these reports are a "must read". LNG exploded out of the blocks not long after these reports were published.
  8. Agree with your musings fredsmart. Its an intriguing situation. Could be the basis of an exam question for post grad business students. Some more thoughts to add to the confusion of the mix. 1. Julian Beale is 77 and has just been re-elected for another term. He is struggling both physically and mentally. He no longer seems to be enjoying the job as Chairman or indeed as a board member. This suggests to me that he has been persuaded to carry on with the understanding that he wont be required to go the full term. i.e. Don't rock the boat just yet! 2. My guess is that Thorney, David Smith and Silvio Salom would be only too happy (perhaps even anxious) to cash in their chips, but as you say, its a question of how. 3. I believe that the scenario of Smith and Salom selling out to Thorney and the same offer being made to the minorities can be ruled out unless it were to be part of a 2 stage process with Thorney then unloading entirely. Both Smith and Salom are ex senior managers of Adacel and Thorney relies on their expertise and knowledge. Also, Thorney are an investment group and would (should) baulk at running a highly technical American based company from their small office in Melbourne by themselves. I come to the same conclusion as you.
  9. Thanks for that Fred. For those who may of missed it, there is a rather nice interview with Seth Brown, the new MD of Adecel on the Adacel web site http://www.adacel.com/press/innews/Seth%20...2%20Oct2011.pdf Of course, the interview is tailored for the US Military but it does beg the question as to whether Adacel can keep increasing their exposure to this sector when they are a publicly owned Australian company. Suppose for instance, that a Chinese state owned company were to make a $2 offer for Adacel. The shareholders would applaud, but the US Government would be less than impressed.
  10. I tootled along to Adacel's AGM last Friday and I must say there was about as much activity and excitement about the company shown at that meeting as we see on this thread. I was one of only 6 shareholders who fronted and we were outnumbered by the suits (board members, auditors, legal representatives etc) who counted to around 18. Chairman Julian Beale made heavy work of reading his speech which was a repeat of what was issued to the stock exchange back in August. He then asked for questions. Perhaps he wished he hadn't. He was roundly abused. By one irate shareholder in particular. The first question was about lack of information provided to the ASX for shareholders. To wit. An announcement in February 2011 that things were going great and then nothing till 22 June when we shareholders were told that everything was a mess. Whatever happened to continuous disclosure? Beale was very uncomfortable and struggled to put any coherent explanation together. Just an apology. I asked whether there had been any turnaround in this financial year to date. He answered this trading was better and it took about 4 follow up questions to get him to state that the company was profitable in the year to date. I'm not sure I believe him or that he even knows. The first questioner made a great issue of the continued lack of performance of the company since going public and questioned the board for its lack of diligence in pursuing their duties and responsibilities. Again he received apologies and not much else. He then commented on the current shareholding weightings and the lack of communication with the minority shareholders not on the board. He asked whether the board had ever considered taking the company private and buying out the minorities. The answer was probably the most interesting thing to come out of the meeting. "a meeting doesn't go by when this issue or some closely associated issue is not discussed" The board was asked about why the take over offer a couple of years back fizzled away. The answer after several attempts to bat the question away was that negotiations were going nowhere and were involving an inordinate amount of management time and resources. Adacel called a halt. After this meeting in which the entire board was subjected to fairly abusive questioning, I suspect that the question of going private will be discussed again.
  11. Thanks for that post Fredsmart, I too, continue to hang on and hope. Your comments summarize the situation quite well and there are one or two points that I would add on the plus side. 1. As you pointed out, their balance sheet is clean. Negligable borrowings. Also, zero intangible assets. They spend considerable sums on writing software (that is their business), but they don't let these costs accumulate on the balance sheet as an intangible asset. They write the cost off straight away. If they followed normal practice (our banks, Telstra etc), they could "trick up" their profitability to make themselves look much better than they portray with their headline profit/loss figures. I guess this accounting honesty comes from having 3 dominant shareholders all on the board who know what the company is really worth while the rest of us rely on the share price to give us a guide. 2. Also as you pointed out, we minor shareholders get told nothing. This doesn't mean that nothing is happening. It is worth regular visits to their web site and in particular their press releases. There are regular announcements of new contracts which would once have been posted as an ASX announcement. These are enough to indicate to me that the company is not stagnating. One recent press release announces a beefing up of the board structure in the US. The reason, according to the press release is the sensitivity there to inviting a foreign owned/controlled company into the secretive areas of defense contracts. I recommend this as a read for holders as it goes some way towards explaining the darth of information we receive directly. It also points to pressures that could be a catalyst for future change. If the defense work grew to significant levels and was held back by the Australian ownership of the company, then another take over offer would most likely emerge. This may not be in a single step. It is plausible that Thorney could instigate a buyout of the minor shareholders, take the company private, and then sell it to a US based owner. If this were the plan, then, the lower the current share price, the better (for Thorney). From my point of view, I am prepared to be patient and justify my patience by convincing myself that the current share price is a very poor indicator of the value of the company
  12. Thanks for that Lizard. Anyone heard who it was that approached Adacel with an offer to buy them out? I'm a bit surprised that it has all gone quiet, because a rebutted initial approach does not usually deter a suitor as cleanly as the current share price suggests.
  13. The punting in this article is that the suiter might be Lockheed Martin after Adacel's voice recognition capabilities or Rytheon after their simulation capabilities. It would seem from Adacel's press release that they are going to sell. Its just a matter of who to and at what price. Adacel flies higher A MARGINALLY profitable aviation simulation business and market laggard might be worth something after all. At least, that's the implication of news from Adacel Technologies that it has received interest from parties considering acquiring the company at a ''substantial premium to the current share price''. The announcement set the shares soaring by 34 per cent as investors punted on exactly what a ''substantial premium'' might involve. At yesterday's close of 60¢, Adacel is valued at $50 million. For the money, an acquirer would get an aviation simulation and control systems developer with a patchy track record. Adacel has won air-traffic control simulation contracts with universities and the Federal Aviation Administration but has had trouble converting the orders into consistent profits. The year to June 2009 was one of the company's best, with net profit of $6.8 million temporarily exciting the market before Adacel returned to a loss in the December half. With up to 90 per cent of sales coming from North America, recent currency fluctuations would not be helping. Nevertheless, Adacel watchers are hoping that a bidder sees value in the company that extends beyond its immediate earnings outlook. Any strategic interest is likely to focus on the company's voice-recognition technologies, developed for the simulator business but increasingly significant to aeroplane cockpit design. The most likely bidder is Lockheed Martin, which has an extensive history working with Adacel, including on the Joint Strike Fighter project, where Adacel is set to provide cockpit voice-recognition systems. Rytheon, an aerospace sector player with extensive simulator capability, may also have interest. www.smh.com.au/business/banks-to-face-tougher-times-warns-deutsche-20100413-s7sg.html
  14. remlif


    Of course pointer that may become a reliable indicator to an impending share price rise is to be aware of the timing of Geoffrey Moles purchases. His antenna seems to be about as good as it gets.
  15. remlif


    Thankyou mosaic Must record my appreciation for your postings around Dec 2007 when all (most) of the directors were flogging significant proportions of their holdings. The price at that time was around $3. I'm truly grateful
  • Create New...