Hi Sharetime,Firstly, I am not doing "well" at all. I have...

First 84 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Justadabble

8,441 Posts.

2860

22/09/21

10:07

Post #: 56256857
Share

Originally posted by share_time: ↑

"Nothing has technically been lost as the 70% -> 36- 40% interest is offset by the $7-9M in cash raised."

The same large holders here will also become the largest holders in the new entity EQN. So they weren't prepared to put their money into PF1 to fund Hammersley, but when they were offered (loose term, maybe orchestrated is better) a bigger slice of the pie for themselves, the money was available. So they don't loose out, they hardly ever do... but someone does, and your smart enough to know who...

"Establishing EQN creates options in terms of ultimate future divestment, eg staged sell down, bookbuild, or takeover. Staged sell down on an as needs basis provides a potential cash generation alternative to CR for PF1."

Most of the options you list are currently available to them now in terms of divestment. Truth is, in what has been one of the greatest bull runs of iron ore seen in many years (ever?) there were no takers/buyers/investors etc... Assume most if not all of the holdings will be escrowed for 12-24 months? That's a long time for PF1 to realise some value in the holding.

"Market timing to launch EQN seems solid, caught the latter end of the Fe price spike, with the benefit of hindsight, quite prudent."

You really think now is a good time to be launching a standalone iron ore entity with a low grade resource....really?

You come across a quite intelligent, and convey your points well, even with very little to work with. Your doing well to try and find positives where, imo, there clearly aren't any (unless you are one of the lucky ones receiving consideration for the EQN IPO). An old mate of mine from the country used to say - "you cant make strawberry jam out of pig shit" He's right of course, but I guess you cant stop people from trying - over to you

Expand

Hi Sharetime,

Firstly, I am not doing "well" at all. I have simply pointed out the worst case scenario for EQN has been well documented by posters and that no thought has been given to the best case scenario. My principal company related question was "what if these assumptions are incorrect"? Your post is predominantly the worst case scenario re-articulated.

To the new points:-
1. PF1 holders were not given the choice to fund Hamersley but they supported the creation of EQN at the SH meeting, which democratically ratifies the board decision.
2. Any SH who has upped their stake on Hammersley by participation in the EQN IPO has paid $0.20/share for the privilege. PF1 SH benefit from that cash injection without dilution, I don't see any actual loss here.
3. "Most of the options you list are currently available to them now in terms of divestment" - disagree.
4. "unless you are one of the lucky ones receiving consideration for the EQN IPO" - I don't understand this comment, can you please elaborate?

Just in case you missed it, I repeat my disclosure - I have not subscribed to the EQN IPO. For total clarity, let me add to that - I will not financially benefit in any way from the EQN IPO.

PF1 Price at posting: 36.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
2 Upvote

1 Great analysis

Reply