What would you benchmark it to then?
Capital asset pricing model will tell you that for a diversified portfolio you should receive market returns (i.e ASX200).
Higher risk (i.e. higher volatility) demands higher returns
Its fair to say GMC is significantly riskier than the ASX, therefore warrants a beta >>>1.
So, if your point is that GMC should have completely outperformed the ASX200, because of its higher risk, then yes I agree with you.
But my point was simply that the ASX200 has returned 20%, but GMC -90% as per the chart.
What's concerning here are the main spikes that occured with GMC were due to events that failed to materialise (i.e Pak Marthen, DSO, manganese mine acquisition).
The big risk here is around the new deadline of 31st May, which is fast approaching.
"As previously announced, the convertible note requires a fiduciary agreement to be registered in Jakarta. This was to be completed with a long stop date of April 30th, 2018. This target was not met, and the long stop date has been extended to 31st May 2018"
From the quarterly GMC had $3.6M cash as at 31 March, with $9.3M budgeted between 31 March and 30 June (presumably related to shipping the smelter, progressing the construction). Obviously, in order to be able to progress, GMC requires the receipt of the $6M, which in turn requires the fiduciary agreement registered by 31st May 2018.
Race against time for GMC. I am seriously concerned about the project progression without the $6.0m funding/ news of the agreement...especially given the debt GMC now have.
Expand
