Hi LewisB …. Yes they obviously did have RCF - long term...

Hi LewisB …. Yes they obviously did have RCF - long term ‘knight’ to this company - standing by.
And with $43m or whatever now invested, it obviously is prepared to back it’s early decision to ‘sponsor’ this company despite delays.

The questions you might better ask is

1 - why did RCF leave it so long to step in? (The CFO surely did not look in the teapot on March 30 and only discover then that TMT was going to have to report it was scraping through the reporting date with one week of funding to save it from needing to give a ‘please explain’ answer to the ASX (and even though I expect merger talks were well on the way, writing that it was intending to merge soon would have caused a bit of an uproar.) Why didn’t TMT raise before that report?​

2 - If you honestly believe 27c was considered to be a reasonable price discount for an $11.5m capital raise on May 24 (saving TMT from embarrassment in its June 30 financial report, which would indeed have been parlous even though it presumably had something over one quarter of funding left on May 24) then why do you believe 32.5c is not a reasonable price at which to translate shares into the new Australian Vanadium entity?​

Looking at the previous financial report estimates, it was obviously using cash faster than anticipated no matter how prudent it was.​

Spoiler : From December 31, 2022 quarterly

https://www.investi.com.au/api/announcements/tmt/ee90ef95-8ce.pdf

Teddie and @Gollada too for that matter … which conclusions which I have made do you believe are ‘foolhardy’?
or ‘bogus and constructed’?
In your case Gollada I honestly think it’s a case of ‘projection overruled’.

And teddie re objecting to less than respectable language from me .. um…. BWAHAHA
You made no objection to @Blythefan calling AVL a “lifetimer outfit helmed by boomers and sinceured lazy puffins” [ref]
Yet you say you respect both boards for making the decision to merge and did not draw anyone’s attention to the refreshment of board and management at AVL in the last year.

It seems to me - from your posts - that you condone negative critique of the “value proposition” no matter how coloured or emotional ( another one was the current situation ‘reeks’ of RCF trying to get people to sell their shares.
And yet for anyone here whose average price is 16c or less the value proposition seems to me to be that that equals 24 new AVL shares at an AVL price of 2.7c and a TMT price of 32.5c?
With all the forward progress to be made under that new management and RCF protection still to come!


Finally @Shawzus:
I never used the word ‘nefarious’ in relation to my theory that the AVL price has been massaged down.
I honestly believe there is nothing wicked or criminal that has occurred in relation to this merger proposal even if the price was ‘massaged’ down to 2.7c.
The fact is that - regardless of vanadium price - shorting at AVL began to increase in quite a dramatic rise from the date of the last capital raise and reknowned shorter - Regal funds - publicizing on the AFR that it wanted the companies to merge;

“Regal’s analyst, Henry Renshaw, believes vanadium redox flow batteries will play a significant role in energy storage over the next decade. ..​

​

..“The [Murchison Technology Metals Project] is shaping up to be one of the best undeveloped vanadium projects globally,” Mr Renshaw said. ​

“We ... consider this to be quite a unique situation where two companies, Technology Metals and Australian Vanadium, each own half of the same orebody. ​

We can see value to be created for the shareholders on both sides through logical consolidation and expect Regal would play a material role in construction funding once there is more clarity on the development pathway.” [ref click link for full story from AFR 27/06/23]​

My personal belief was that whatever the ‘punters’ reading that thought, for the funds and market players Henry was essentially declaring ‘open season’ for anyone wanting to ‘play’ with the idea that the higher MC of the two companies would decrease substantially in value especially considering RCF’s $11.5m investment in AVL in the months preceding and the financial position leading to thd capital raise at TMT.

As said, but maybe the drop was connected only to the fall in Vanadium prices.

Cheers