If all of the office wallahs and fee earning advisors who are salivating at this consolidation were sent out to dig gold then it would definitely have a positive effect on the share price. I have no time for this smoke and mirrors crap. Vote "No"
VAU - Vault Minerals
- Thread starter Uncle Festivus
- Start date
- Joined
- 15 June 2011
- Posts
- 112
- Reactions
- 0
After todays debarkle I will be voting a big fat "NO"
Hey Beatle ! You must have known something with the annual report out this arvo.
On a quick scan through we get a royalty payment from (I think Galaxy lithium mine near Ravensthorpe) about $ 460,000 do you know anything about this and if it is an ongoing royalty payment. I cant find anything about it on any of their reports. I'm rather interested to find out .Thanks anyway.
I tried unsuccessfully to stop the second tranche of shares being issued at 17c. (Share price was 22c immediately prior). Its my call that these holders, having seen the shares as low as 11.5 c since, are jumpy at this "consolidation" cleverness and are taking a 10% profit.
Vote "No"
Vote "No"
- Joined
- 7 September 2011
- Posts
- 356
- Reactions
- 1
Wouldn't be concerned. You should have waited and topped up at these prices lostmyshirt.
All my gold stocks down today. Think this one will fluctuate between the 18's for 21's for a while till the gold starts pouring. Give or take a few $0.05's.
I would prefer a VB HDT or a VN Group A SS...
True.
XAO took a little bit of a hit today - nothing out of the ordinary. I will be topping up though - Business has been going well lately.
- Joined
- 17 October 2008
- Posts
- 53
- Reactions
- 0
Not that I am a expert for RED5 but did see a little about this in a previous quarterly review
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...sg=AFQjCNE420dJPW5CBER8WAS1VqTFobh2VA&cad=rja
Quarterly Review 3 months ended 30th June 2011
Finance
• Cash position (no debt) $52.5 million (unaudited) at period close
with a further $34.4 million allocated to completing the mine build
• Royalty (Mt Cattlin tantalum ore) revenue of $265,000 received
from Galaxy Resources Limited
Don't know any more info than that sorry
- Joined
- 17 October 2008
- Posts
- 53
- Reactions
- 0
I would like to hear from you guys that are posting no, or what smoke and mirror stuff that is going on.
If you own 25,000 @ 20 cents or 2,500 @ $2 surely this still = $5000
I would have thought that a share consolidation would be a good thing as any time that the share price moves that you would not lose or gain 2.50% for every movement in share price.
25,000 @ 20 cents the share price drops to 19.5(min drop)cents you are down 2.50%
2500 @ $2 share price moves down to $1.99(min drop) then you are down .50%
Any thoughts????
If you own 25,000 @ 20 cents or 2,500 @ $2 surely this still = $5000
I would have thought that a share consolidation would be a good thing as any time that the share price moves that you would not lose or gain 2.50% for every movement in share price.
25,000 @ 20 cents the share price drops to 19.5(min drop)cents you are down 2.50%
2500 @ $2 share price moves down to $1.99(min drop) then you are down .50%
Any thoughts????
- Joined
- 20 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,544
- Reactions
- 1
I am not 100% sure what you are trying to say, however if it is that all else being equal, having less shares means it doesn't drop by the same % as it would otherwise in an identical scenario, then it is generally false.
Right then.
My personal prediction was that the sp would drop to around 0.190 around the end of this week / start of next. Today's sp bottom at 0.180 was very surprising - and on significantly higher volume than for the last week or two as well.
I did not have to look long to find out why however, gold took a very significant plunge, to almost $1600. At the moment, gold is within an inch of the bottom of it's uptrend. If it goes below $1600, this will be a very bearish signal for gold (and hence gold miners). This is the main reason for the sell off in my view (I do not think it has anything to do with the share split).
The window of buyers to sellers narrowed and inverted as I thought it would as well today, before returning to positive (ie. more buyers than sellers) - though I'm not jumping back in just yet.
Like I said previously, I will still elect to wait until the start of next week to see what EU will do before buying back in, as I feel it is too much of a gamble to be long over the weekend.
The weakness in gold in my view again relates to the EU (disagreement and lack of consensus on what to do this very weekend), however this level of analysis is somewhat beyond me, so it's just an opinion.
- Joined
- 14 December 2009
- Posts
- 882
- Reactions
- 1
I hear you on the gold price, what confuses me is that generally the gold market would be rallying hard at the moment due to the currency uncertainty.
Not that there is much point in trying to understand these things, but there you go.
Lets see what the next few weeks hold for RED.
Not that there is much point in trying to understand these things, but there you go.
Lets see what the next few weeks hold for RED.
- Joined
- 20 May 2011
- Posts
- 1,544
- Reactions
- 1
As far as I understand it, the perception is that any trouble in EU causes a flight of money from the euro to the US, rallying US against everything else. So bad EU news = gold down, good (short term) EU news = gold up.
I wanted to ask about this phenomena I've just noticed:
Now I haven't been doing this for even half a year, so can someone explain what the heck's going on? I can imagine wanting to split up really big trades, but this?
Is someone trying to make the SP constantly appear at 0.185 in case anyone buys at 0.190? Even though nobody is buying up to that anyway? I just don't get it.
Hi All RED followers, some interesting posts, some controversial, lol.
Mardo, I was surprised they put the AGM and annual report out on the same day, as I would have thought it deserved its own day, and today was actually the obvious day for me to expect it, so I was wrong too - but now that the paperwork for the admin is out of the way then we have a week available next week when I believe we may get some more positive announcements IMO.
As for Mt Cattlin, this is where my alzheimers steps in, gee I'm getting old and honestly can't recall it, but I do recall that Greenstone had nickel and other tenements down Ravensthorpe way (they tried to float them off through a group of guys who did nothing and GNR did a lousy deal with them at the time I recall). It was a time of divestment by the company when the board had just changed from the old Stan Mac controlled company to when Opus was acquired (for Indee) and just prior Siana had been brought into GNR. When GE and LG got on board they wanted to just pursue Siana and remove the other projects. Obviously Mt Cattlin was part of it, but I simply can't recall now.
As for Starcraftmazter, seems to me you have got a very sound strategy if you are trading, that there is no point to get on board with the unknowns of the G20 meeting and a declining gold price still to be played out. I am in a very different position, I have got a stack of shares (and still buying occasionally), I am in it for the longer term benefits of it being a long term low cost gold producer and I'm waiting for the production phase to provide a premium to NPV and not a discount to it. And as I have repeated so many times, even if the gold price moves down to US1,000 you will get a higher RED share price once its producing at the rate of 100,000 ounces per year and above (current mine plan which is due to be revised, suggests 130,000 ounces of gold in year 3).
Pwpike, you have posted only at times to have "a go" at management, and I don't have a problem that there is someone like you out there watching the management to keep them honest! its good for corporate governance. But your comment about "If all of the office wallahs and fee earning advisors who are salivating at this consolidation were sent out to dig gold then it would definitely have a positive effect on the share price. I have no time for this smoke and mirrors crap. Vote "No" " I think you need to explain further, it seems to me you are implying that there are huge fees involved with the consolidation process. If that is what you are saying then I can confirm categorically that you are very wrong. There is very little cost associated with a consolidation of share capital. I have been involved (on the board) of a company that was in a very different position (financially and project-wise) and had to do a consolidation to keep its listing (by raising funds). That consolidation which is no different to the process of consolidation of RED share capital cost absolutely bugger all, it was handled by the part-time company secretary and took little time, but co-operation with the ASX!
Mardo, I was surprised they put the AGM and annual report out on the same day, as I would have thought it deserved its own day, and today was actually the obvious day for me to expect it, so I was wrong too - but now that the paperwork for the admin is out of the way then we have a week available next week when I believe we may get some more positive announcements IMO.
As for Mt Cattlin, this is where my alzheimers steps in, gee I'm getting old and honestly can't recall it, but I do recall that Greenstone had nickel and other tenements down Ravensthorpe way (they tried to float them off through a group of guys who did nothing and GNR did a lousy deal with them at the time I recall). It was a time of divestment by the company when the board had just changed from the old Stan Mac controlled company to when Opus was acquired (for Indee) and just prior Siana had been brought into GNR. When GE and LG got on board they wanted to just pursue Siana and remove the other projects. Obviously Mt Cattlin was part of it, but I simply can't recall now.
As for Starcraftmazter, seems to me you have got a very sound strategy if you are trading, that there is no point to get on board with the unknowns of the G20 meeting and a declining gold price still to be played out. I am in a very different position, I have got a stack of shares (and still buying occasionally), I am in it for the longer term benefits of it being a long term low cost gold producer and I'm waiting for the production phase to provide a premium to NPV and not a discount to it. And as I have repeated so many times, even if the gold price moves down to US1,000 you will get a higher RED share price once its producing at the rate of 100,000 ounces per year and above (current mine plan which is due to be revised, suggests 130,000 ounces of gold in year 3).
Pwpike, you have posted only at times to have "a go" at management, and I don't have a problem that there is someone like you out there watching the management to keep them honest! its good for corporate governance. But your comment about "If all of the office wallahs and fee earning advisors who are salivating at this consolidation were sent out to dig gold then it would definitely have a positive effect on the share price. I have no time for this smoke and mirrors crap. Vote "No" " I think you need to explain further, it seems to me you are implying that there are huge fees involved with the consolidation process. If that is what you are saying then I can confirm categorically that you are very wrong. There is very little cost associated with a consolidation of share capital. I have been involved (on the board) of a company that was in a very different position (financially and project-wise) and had to do a consolidation to keep its listing (by raising funds). That consolidation which is no different to the process of consolidation of RED share capital cost absolutely bugger all, it was handled by the part-time company secretary and took little time, but co-operation with the ASX!
Just a bit more re the Share Capital Consolidation, you might recall I mentioned in a post about 1 week ago that I believed that CJ and GE were traveling to London and North America for a roadshow, I would presume what was actually happening on that trip (which is continuing until early next week) was they were getting insto support and discussing this issue. That is probably also why there was reduced trading volume this past week as the insto's had to pull back from trading by being involved on these highly confidential and sensitive matter.
I have no doubt that the insto's in North America want this consolidation proceed, and surely it will benefit us all if we have constructive shareholders together agreeing that this should proceed, and with a view that it will increase shareholder value by limiting the scatter of trading that is happening out there with over a billion and a quarter shares on issue. Personally I can see the benefits of it, especially as we start moving into gold production with significant positive cash flows.
As you can expect, I will definitely vote YES, for my own selfish reason of wanting the insto's supporting the stock, and getting more stable shareholders who hold for longer term periods who also want longer term positive price appreciation. (Don't misinterpret my view of traders, but I think that RED is a longer term Buy, not a micro-minute trade, and as I have said, I have had RED and its predecessor GNR for around 14 years!!!). I now want to shine in the glory of gold production and significant price movements upwards!
I have no doubt that the insto's in North America want this consolidation proceed, and surely it will benefit us all if we have constructive shareholders together agreeing that this should proceed, and with a view that it will increase shareholder value by limiting the scatter of trading that is happening out there with over a billion and a quarter shares on issue. Personally I can see the benefits of it, especially as we start moving into gold production with significant positive cash flows.
As you can expect, I will definitely vote YES, for my own selfish reason of wanting the insto's supporting the stock, and getting more stable shareholders who hold for longer term periods who also want longer term positive price appreciation. (Don't misinterpret my view of traders, but I think that RED is a longer term Buy, not a micro-minute trade, and as I have said, I have had RED and its predecessor GNR for around 14 years!!!). I now want to shine in the glory of gold production and significant price movements upwards!
Hello Beatle,
Management want to do something with which I don't agree. Not exactly the same as "having a go at them" I would have thought. I am very happy with this management when their focus is on digging gold at which they appear to be very proficient. All I ask is that they focus on digging and selling gold. I don't believe for a moment that that share consolidations increase the SP. Earnings increase the SP and if they don't I am quite happyto receive my dividends until the SP catches up with the P/E and especially the yield as it always does. Whatever the costs involved they come straight off the bottom line and the machinations are a distraction to management.
Cheers
Management want to do something with which I don't agree. Not exactly the same as "having a go at them" I would have thought. I am very happy with this management when their focus is on digging gold at which they appear to be very proficient. All I ask is that they focus on digging and selling gold. I don't believe for a moment that that share consolidations increase the SP. Earnings increase the SP and if they don't I am quite happyto receive my dividends until the SP catches up with the P/E and especially the yield as it always does. Whatever the costs involved they come straight off the bottom line and the machinations are a distraction to management.
Cheers
For me, with the share price so low at 18.5c, 19, 19.5c etc, consolidation is a good thing.
Every move now is a 2.5% increase or decrease, which I think is quite stupid.
Consolidate so the increases and decreases are NOT 2.5% (or 5%, 7.5% etc) every day
With shares, you should be able to buy them down to the very cent! Not .5 cent
Every move now is a 2.5% increase or decrease, which I think is quite stupid.
Consolidate so the increases and decreases are NOT 2.5% (or 5%, 7.5% etc) every day
With shares, you should be able to buy them down to the very cent! Not .5 cent
Thanks for your quick reply FwPike, and of course I don't agree with your view of RED and our combined expectations of finally producing gold, actually achieving an EPS after such a long time, and in time getting shareholder value for shares held. We both want them focus on that. But I don't have any issue in them improving the appeal of the company for current and potential future share investors, remembering of course that not only does RED have a considerable overseas shareholding base already, but we are more likely to get more premium by having offshore investors - and I give as an example CGX (with its Philippine based gold production at Masbate), that over time has moved most of its shareholder base across to N America from Australia due to more interest by larger N American insto's to Philippine based gold production.
Actually on behalf of us shareholders I consider share capital management is an important aspect, and I for one would be very happy once having oodles of cash in treasury, for RED to do a share capital buyback, and actually expected that with 10% of the 1.28 billion shares on issue. Clearly that won't proceed now due to the consolidation.
I think the real issue for some shareholders, especially day traders and short term speculators in the stock, has been the stigma of consolidations being associated with companies having financial/fund-raising problems, and this inference with RED clearly is not the reason for RED undergoing such a process.
Back to the gold production, you can be assured that GE is much more focussed on the site activities, he has demonstrated that over many years, so it clearly won't be affecting his future efforts to increase shareholder value.
Actually on behalf of us shareholders I consider share capital management is an important aspect, and I for one would be very happy once having oodles of cash in treasury, for RED to do a share capital buyback, and actually expected that with 10% of the 1.28 billion shares on issue. Clearly that won't proceed now due to the consolidation.
I think the real issue for some shareholders, especially day traders and short term speculators in the stock, has been the stigma of consolidations being associated with companies having financial/fund-raising problems, and this inference with RED clearly is not the reason for RED undergoing such a process.
Back to the gold production, you can be assured that GE is much more focussed on the site activities, he has demonstrated that over many years, so it clearly won't be affecting his future efforts to increase shareholder value.
- Joined
- 7 September 2011
- Posts
- 356
- Reactions
- 1
Guy, I have but one simple and single question to ask and I hope smoeone here can give me a good answer (I am not able to answer this for myself).
If Red 5 Limited has cash surplus and fully funded operations, why is there need to gather noth american interest? In my view this is to secure future capital raising - but I was under the impression that Red 5 Limited did not require further capital raising.
I am very unsure as to why this has been done - and if it does not go through it could be dire for the company. If they had mentioned they require capital raising this would make sense - but no mention has been made, and this has to be the strangest proposition I have heard.
If Red 5 Limited has cash surplus and fully funded operations, why is there need to gather noth american interest? In my view this is to secure future capital raising - but I was under the impression that Red 5 Limited did not require further capital raising.
I am very unsure as to why this has been done - and if it does not go through it could be dire for the company. If they had mentioned they require capital raising this would make sense - but no mention has been made, and this has to be the strangest proposition I have heard.
As I understand it LostMyShirt there are US funds that don't allow trading in shares that trade for less than a dollar. They have their reasons I guess. Why their reasons evaporate by simply consolidating shares I don't have any idea. In any case this might be a valid consideration at the developing stage but once we have earnings, P/E and yield are what matter to most investors.
- Joined
- 7 September 2011
- Posts
- 356
- Reactions
- 1
What Benifit does Red 5 Limited get from insto's buying on market shares in Red 5? Unless they are after future capital raising, the price of the share is meaningless to Red 5, is it not?
As far as I understand it, the perception is that any trouble in EU causes a flight of money from the euro to the US, rallying US against everything else. So bad EU news = gold down, good (short term) EU news = gold up.
I wanted to ask about this phenomena I've just noticed:
Now I haven't been doing this for even half a year, so can someone explain what the heck's going on? I can imagine wanting to split up really big trades, but this?
Is someone trying to make the SP constantly appear at 0.185 in case anyone buys at 0.190? Even though nobody is buying up to that anyway? I just don't get it.
Starcraftmazter good spot i just had a look myself i hope somebody can give an opinion on why this is being done
Cheers