Yeah, I had a chance to look at the updated LGI pathfinder...

Yeah, I had a chance to look at the updated LGI pathfinder documents today. There has been some change. Firstly, they are expecting a much better FY22 based on the higher NEM prices. So although the share price has increased slightly, they actually have substantially lower multiples *based on FY22*. I stress that bit because I think it would be better to use a normalised level of revenue, EBITDA and NPAT rather than the FY22 peak levels.

Here are the updated valuation figures:


And here are the updated guidance form the pathfinder, and you will notice the significant pullback in EBITDA margin based on lower energy prices in the NEM (still forecasting $147 I think, which seems quite bullish):


Takes a keen eye to notice, but they have also paired back their growth forecasts too. So previously they expected 114 MCUM (7% growth) in FY24, now it is 112 (6%). Similarly, they are forecasting a reduction from 402k to 384k ACCUs. Not sure why.


One could interpret the LGI IPO as a sign that they can't get access to finance elsewhere, similar problem to Delorean. They currently have $21m of debt, on $2m EBIT with comparable levels of revenue to Delorean. So I am not sure if access to finance is the reason for their IPOing - maybe, most of it will go to repay debt and CAPEX - but it could also be just increased liquidity for shareholders (classic Vik move).

If you believe that LGI is IPOig because of access to finance, then Delorean's situation is perhaps an industry wide issue for bioenergy. If you believe that they already have $21m, could possibly get more, and are IPO'ing for valuation/liquidity issues, then the problem is with Planum/Delorean. I don't know the answer to that - I just know I prefer Delorean's valuation and pipeline.