Jump to content

Sinner

Member
  • Posts

    663
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Sinner's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

0

Reputation

  1. Sinner

    AZZ

    I read it that they thinking of flipping their current assets and moving on somewhere else, like they did a few years back with the Eagleford. All the current indications point to that, as long as the LOI for the current sale is executed.
  2. Howdy Mista, Yep, I wish I had sold at >$10 and it is something I'm still regretting. I cannot argue whatsoever with you on that one! I would happily buy you a beer and chat that over (and WCL to boot!), but at the end of the day I'm where I am with what I have. Spilled milk stuff. A few years back management claimed or at least strongly inferred they were on the cusp of a revolutionary and marked increase in solar cell efficiency, (not just the rooftop solar panels they ended up producing for a time) and the share was also being spruiked by an apparently influential newsletter who always were in for a good time, not a long time. Those things combined to push the price up to the $13 level. Had solar come off, it was possibly not unrealistic, but upon reflection, was still stretched. Management failed to deliver on the solar aspect, and the rest is history. The GE deal does not come off, I suspect the company is in trouble-I think the shareprice currently reflects that risk/reward trade. To posters such as Moosey and myself, we believe the deal will come off for a variety of reasons posted here and elsewhere. Doesn't mean it will, though... Cheers, and here's hoping WCL works out!
  3. Mista, Moosey has been posting since the share was about 30c, so in that regard it is a ten bagger for him. There are reasons for the shareprice decline other than a simple correlation between GE and SLX which frankly I'm surprised you make. The truth is other issues played a major role in kicking the price up that far. I may not always agree with the optimistic assessments Moosey makes, but I cannot question his contribution to the thread. I've remained in SLX (I'm almost free carried-a few cents per share average cost now) purely because of the GE deal. For clarity, assuming the process is commercialised, SLX gets 7-12% of the REVENUE (note revenue, not profit) for doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. In perpetuity-no patent expiry. So if this one gets rolling, SLX shareholders will be laughing all the way to the bank, at least on the U side of things. Cheers!
  4. Some light hearted humour to break the tension. I have it on good authority (i.e. made up) that this is what will be written up in the newspaper after the SLX AGM. Takeover speculation mounts after Silex AGM, by Ann Onimus The Silex AGM was held today, and curiously coincided with a temporary increase in the availability of beds in the manic depressive ward of the nearby hospital. After the AGM, Dr. Michael Goldworthy was asked if there was any truth to the rumour GE was considering making a bid for outright ownership of the promising uranium enrichment technology. “Yes, I’ve heard that too†he replied, “but that possibility has been circulating for several yearsâ€ÂÂÂÂÂ. He continued with “However, as CEO it is my duty to ensure any offer price, if it eventuates, is materially above the market capitalisation of our company. As we all know†he continued, “there are two ways to achieve that. The first is to apply ourselves to the successful development and deployment of our technologies, in order to ensure their cumulative value exceeds the market capitalisation of the company. However, there always remains an issue in that we cannot actually control any bid price that GE may choose to offer. We therefore chose a different approach, namely to focus ourselves on what we can at least indirectly control, which is of course the Silex share price. As you can clearly see, we are now much more likely to receive a takeover offer at a price in excess of market cap than we were just a few years ago†beamed Dr. Goldworthy, earnestly. He then quickly apologised for the unplanned increase in the shareprice over much of the preceding year that worked contrary to this prime objective, but noted that it “is all part of the R&D challengeâ€ÂÂÂÂÂ. He then pointed out that the shareprice has since reverted to form over the last two months, and that the very low price a year ago did present an attractive benefit to all Silex shareholders who of course received the annual distribution of free options at the “bargain basement†price of circa $2.10. Dr. Goldworthy appeared genuinely shocked when advised that only select people received the aforementioned options and not all shareholders. “Well how did they get their shares†he asked, puzzled. At this stage the CFO interjected and whispered something in Dr. Goldworthy's ear. Looking pensive, he nodded and advised that he now understood why some shareholders had complained about crystallising losses on their Silex shares, something that, in his defence, he emphasised he was personally oblivious to. “So not everybody gets them for free†he sagely added. In order to lighten the now sombre mood, he adopted a different tack-he tried to crack a joke in relation to the show “Your money, your call†on Foxtel’s business channel. “Y’know, in our ivory coated halls at work, specifically in the finance department, I came up with a really funny name for what a TV show based our enterprise could be named-‘My money, my call’. Ha ha, get it? ‘My money Mi-chael’, like ‘Michael’s money’. Gee, we laughed for hours over that one.†The laughter which then emanated from Dr. Goldworthy and the Board of Directors upon being reminded of that anecdote (professional integrity and my respect for comedians prevents me from calling it a joke) was quickly dispelled by a passing shareholder who emphasised the words differently, saying “No, it is actually MY money, Michael.†Dr. Goldworthy then quietly mumbled something to the BoD about restricting the access of delusional shareholders in subsequent AGMs, before getting back to the business of answering questions. He was then asked about whether he had had any detailed discussion with GE regarding their potential purchase of the Silex company as a whole. “Most definitely not†he replied, adding quickly that GE was only interested in the laser enrichment process. “Preliminary discussions had shown that including Translucent as a going business would have seen any proposed offer price decrease by 25 percent, and the addition of Chronologic to the deal which, even with the inclusion of the laser enrichment process, would result in us having to pay a not insubstantial amount to GE.†After a pause, he ruefully added “They’re not stupidâ€ÂÂÂÂÂ. He then closed the AGM by finishing off with a magic trick he has perfected over the last several years-making a $1 coin disappear before amazingly pulling it out of the ear of a nearby shareholder. He then successfully repeated the trick using a $2 coin. However he was only partly successful when he attempted the same trick using $36.97M-he was only able make that disappear. If it helps to take away the pain.....
  5. I think the diehards converse mainly over at HC nowadays. Toby (Gone Fishin') posted it there a few hours back. It still needs an official stamp, but it appears as good as there. Once that occurs, we then rely on GE deciding to go ahead with it. Will they play us for suckers?
  6. Sinner

    KZL

    Jeeves, The 'mining boom' is not as widespread as it is made out to be-it is really iron ore, coal and gold that have really been winners. Copper is OK. But other commodities less so, particularly when the currency conversion is taken into account. So the complaints the manufacturing industry etc have re the 'mining boom' is, as you suggest, a problem for the miners whose commodities have not appreciated as much as the aforementioned others. Probably moreso, as the zinc miner skills are more readily translated to gold miner skills than say an automotive engineer's skills.
  7. Sinner

    HGO

    HGO a broker tip in today's West based on first production just occurring-Shaw stockbroking, target of 46c.
  8. I can't afford the flight from Perth given SLX is now at <20% of its high a few years back. I would ask MG to name ONE technology in the past 15 years that has been successfully developed by SLX and been profitable. Don't accept U enrichment-it has not been successfully developed. I would then ask if they see a trend in that result and if they could learn from it. I'd follow up with asking them what their exit strategies for each technology is, to minimise shareholder losses. I'd ask what he thinks about the ex-Translucent guys who (based on a post here a month or so back) are successfully developing solar cells using ideas that Translucent have been unable to capitalise on-where do we stand with them? I would ask him WHY we should continue to hold SLX given we've 'watched this space' for a year and only seen a financial vacuum. SLX might hope to provide U enrichment-I want to see financial enrichment! I see MG is being offered long term incentives. The last time he was offered those, in 2006, the price was >$5. So, his 'incentive' has resulted in a ~60% decrease in shareprice. Why do we need to offer him incentives now, or if we do, they should be priced at the 2006 level (i.e. $800k salary/$5.5) and not 2011 level ($800k/$2.2). I would also ask the entire board if they have shown faith and have been or will be buying SLX shares at the current prices (note the difference between buying and being given them). I could and would ask lots more if I was attending.
  9. I would guess they are financial partners and privvy to the 'big picture', but not the details of the science.
  10. ...and for those who prefer, a transcript of the interview is here Arminius, yes, there is that hope, but I feel it is far more likely than not. Aus and US governments have had the chance to stop this for well over a decade. I would argue their support of it is a key point, assuming it passes the proper regulatory requirements that were already in place and not those now being talked about by people (with no authority) re proliferation concerns. If they had really been worried, they would have been rallying 10 years ago when USEC was still on board. Where were they then? Should USA or Aus change the rules or shift the goalposts retrospectively I assume GE and SLX would sue the pants off them for misleading and deceptive conduct. At the end of the day, if one lot of people can do it, another lot will be able to also do it-regardless of whether or not the first lot ever go commercial. The proverbial cat is out of the bag, and I'm sure even the whingers know it. USSR and other countries have had the bomb for over half a century-the world has not ended. One of the things the older lady was protesting about was the development of nuclear bombs despite the secrecy surrounding it. That is a case in point-others were already well on the way to developing it, and it was only a matter of time before they too had it. And there has been no world wars in that time-a much better record than the first half of the 20th century.
  11. Silex and U enrichment got a run on ABC's 7:30 report tonight. As you'd expect from Auntie, the focus was on the chicken littles saying the sky was going to fall down if laser enrichment occurs. Can't they understand that even if they stop GE, others would follow (or in the case of Iran, are already there apparently). However, for those with a more pragmatic viewpoint (not to mention anticipated financial bias), there were some juicy quotes from MG re likelihood of NRC approval and potential revenue. Plus the narrator was talking about how this could make the owners very rich. I assume it will be on ABC Iview at some stage. Look for the Tues Sept 27 link here.
  12. Like all long time SLX shareholders, I'm ruing not selling the lot when the price was $10+. There's always reasons for selling/not selling, fear and greed being two prominent ones. Of course, those same emotions can affect purchasing decisions as well. It strikes me that SLX at the current price is very undervalued IF you believe that GE WILL progress the SLX enrichment process. All indications others and I can find and that have been shared with all of us on this and other forums suggest they will. That will put SLX in a relatively financially secure position going forward. Although aspects of the solar front could potentially be very costly (with, I hope, commensurate reward), it should be remembered that if the worst comes to the worst, SLX could pull the pin on everything other than U enrichment. On that 'scenario' SLX would then revert to receiving money from GE for nothing and suddenly the current shareprice would look extremely cheap. What the directors would need to do is clearly know when to make that call. Their handling of Chrono suggests they currently do not know how-they'd better learn, and fast IMO.
  13. With thanks to Bethonic at SG, interview with MG here.
  14. Iggle, Fair call. Obviously that second hurdle is far less onerous to get across and, in terms of a defense, it is harder to arrange. It is relatively easy to get 25% if one or a few substantial shareholders throw their weight behind you. Getting to 50% of the small voters and having them stick with you is a far less simple task. Nebo, for an interesting takeover (IMO), you should look over the history of the Consolidated Minerals takeover where (I believe) management actively withheld information from shareholders (the skyrocketing manganese price) in order to let Brian Gilbertson effectively take over the company at a lowball price. Check the Consolidated Minerals-VOTE NO website. Shareholder activism (me included) saw the offer price go from ~$2.30 to over $5. Not all is attributable to our efforts as other parties subsequently bid for the assets, but we certainly highlighted the value of the company to other interested parties. The current CST revolt seems to have suffered as no other company has stepped up to the plate. Investors are therefore left to decide whether to take the money and run or ride with the current setup. And in the current uncertain climate (why does it always seem to be that?!), $ rule.
  15. Are CSAG organisers really to blame for the backflip? ALL shareholders, Vic included, have a right to change their mind. If Vic changes his, so what? If you are all still outraged, and fellow shareholders who, collectively with you, hold over 25% of the shares, vote against it, it won't get up. If you are outraged, stand up and lead the charge in his stead. It is up to you. My guess is that enough institutional shareholders signaled they will accept the improved offer, causing the blocking stake to fall under the 25% required to block the S of A. If so, it is game over.
×
×
  • Create New...