WC, my refernce to down ramping may have been a little harsh, apologies.
For the record, I respect everyone has a view & HC is as good a forum as any to express them especially when it comes to small ASX listed companies. Although I don't need to quote Shakespeare to table mine, simply what was in the last quartery did the trick and as it had a fair bit of actual activity, my response may have come across as long-winded. I note, you've asked my some direct questions, so I'll happily address, whilst seeking to clarify some of the comments in my previous post.
"For example, the photos you use to demonstrate your point are literally capping soil samples to be analysed at the university"
Correct, although the methane control program that these images relate to present the first time (from my understanding) that ZEO's technology is leaving the lab environment and being applied on-site at Cleanaway's landfill site for in the field testing. From the program activities tabled in relevant ASX release, the first half of the 12-mth program is indoors (desktop) and the second half on-site in the real world. So ZEO is finally tabling its going to leave the lab environment, which is what needs to happen for tech to be commercialised IMO. That said, the application of methane control using zeolite layer will need to work.
I won't comment on your view of valuation & the humor you seem to find in professionals wearing safety equipment.
"Now your purporting that the projecty has value because of legal case. Which is it?"
My previous comments regarding Abercorn are simply based on the fact its maiden JORC resource prseents with a 28% alumina grade kaolin (yielding at only around 35%). That would indicate that the balance of the resource in most parts (65%) is primarily quartz (sand) and as such, it would not be an attractive direct shipping ore product (>50% of what you'd be paying shipping on would be sand) and if the resource was to be processed into the 28% alumina kaolin, one would need to mine/wash around 3 tonnes to get 1 tonne of actual saleable product and to do that you'd need to spend big $ on a wet processing plant, hence my reference to ADN (they tabled a PFS which offered insight on the costs)
As the JORC announcement states, Abercorn does present with a large resource of kaolin (as ZEO states 'consistent grade'), I assume ZEO's management is still trying to work out what it can do with it, as from my reading Abercorn kaolin does seem to have anything special about it (ie Halloysite ADN and high-grade raw ore 37% alumina like Toondoon) so no rationale for it to be a DSO play (which was how it was presented in a MSE investor presentation on the ASX in late 2019, whilst Goody who vended the asset was on the board as Technical Director - I don't think Zardo was even employed by MSE/ZEO back then).
"Unfortunately there are numerous public announcements where Zardo has pontoficated the virtues of this project"
I haven't taken much note of Abercorn announcements (I'm in it for the zeolite technology), although your comments above had me review MSE/ZEO announcement history since they acquired Abercorn and I couldn't find a standalone announcement on the Abercorn Project since Goody departed from the board and not sure one/tow lines at the end of a Quarterly/Half Yearly/Annual Report would equate to 'pontificate the virtues' The last actual directors comment specific to the Abercorn Project from a director of the company (which I could find) was in July 2020 maiden JORC ASX release, where Goody stated: Although, I didn't spend to much time on the announcement review, so I may have missed Zardo specifically marketing the virtues of the project, after above - but could be proven wrong. "In the 2021 Annnual Report it was supposedly a resource of significant scale, open in all directions with a consistent grade, low impurities and close to the surface and also close to ports and highway. And with only 10% drilled Zardo declared it had potential for substantial upgarde. And yet they did not elect to pursue a low-cost scoping study"
The comments your refer to in 2021 FY AR, IMO are simply a reflection of the information thyat was garnered leading up to & including (what I assume would be costly) maiden JORC announcement & to some extend still appears on ZEO's website today. I assume subject comments still stand - I would think the primary issue today's board face, is what can you actually do with all this 'consistent grade' kaolin - not that its open in all directions (maiden JORC was 39m tonnes - so that's a lot)
Actually, the comments you table were also in July 2020 ASX maiden JORC release:
The big point, I believe your trying to make relates to the legal proceedings "And yet they elected not to pursue a low-cost scoping study"
Personally, I have not idea what is required to complete a ASX JORC code compliant scoping study, although I do note you missed tabling completion of a scoping study was the 2nd Performance Rights milestone (part of Abercorn acquistion) and carried with it the issuance on satisfaction of 75m (yes 75m) fully-paid shares (noting MSE/ZEO had already parted with >300m shares for Abercorn Project in upfront/first milestone) So, the true cost to ZEO SH's was around an additional 5% dilution not a low-cost scoping study. So safe to assume, the ZEO board, has taken the view that issuing 75m shares for a second "Performance" milestone was on Abercorn asset was not in the best interest of all SH's (well I hope so and those other SH's hold around 1.5bn after you excl. Goody). This quantum of shares associated with Abercorn's final Performance Rights, is even more telling when SH's weigh up the fact ZEO board secured Toondoon ML + EPM's, with a larger footprint than Abercorn and approved mining lease & what the company states some of Australia's highest grade raw ore kaolin for only 37m shares in Aug 2021. This event logically put Abercorn on the backburner in IMO - why chase a scoping study on a inferior resource, which would take (I think) around 3 years to obtain mining lease approval, when you've secured a premium kaolin asset with ML in place. As a SH, I'm glad the BOD didn't spend further on Abercorn, buying Toondoon represented an issuance of shares that was half that of the 2nd milestone for Abercorn.
As for your lawyers comment. Regrettably lawyers are lawyers and the financial risk/cost of litigation lands with the parties involved - the lawyers get paid no matter who wins or loses and in this instance the dispute does look to revolve around Performance Rights - which are a well known security on the ASX, I assume they have certain factors that determine how they are issued & ultimately granted (mainly some level of Performance) and many have expired without vesting. Ultimately it may end up a case (pardon the pun) that a court will need to decide if the parties can't reach agreement in the mediation mentioned in the quarterly. I hope its resolved, for all SH's and that includes Goody, so ZEO can focus on its technology and quality kaolin asset.
"If he wins the court case or settles then ZEO needs to raise capital, if he loses then hos 90 million shares pose a significant risk problem. Its impossible to invest with any comfort under these circumstances and I'm personally privy to some large shareholders who are very nervous and very unhappy"
I suppose the true evaluation of the final outcome will only be known when we find out if it costs ZEO SH's more than 75m shares IMO. Your view that its impossible to invest is yours and your entitle to it and also note you don't hold any ZEO shares in your HC position (some might find it interesting you have been so virtuous to share your concerns with the rest of us here on ZEO's thread on HC). I've been around a while and I've seen plenty of times fear (which it seems your telegraphing) makes for great buying opportunities, which would not have been possible without a level of uncertainty, which is what speculative investment is all about. Albeit, I'm by no way suggesting ZEO's circumstance is preferred - I do believe all that is transpiring may well, benefit those that believe that ZEO has a what it takes from a climate tech perspective (although needs to deliver) to weigh up the risk / reward sceanrio & make their own decision. Of course you've made your position clear.
“In respect to the Toondoon “experts report”, you highlighted a valuation between $7m and $65m. In other words, the so called “expert” has no idea what it’s worth. Imagine a real estate agent valuing your residential property between $700k and $6.5m. That’s absurd. Predictably you’ve adopted the high number in your rhetoric.”
As for the IER Technical Report, it seems your suggesting https://deriskgeomining.com/ has no idea & you have. I simply provided the summary table that appeared in the report lodged with the ASX and highlighted the mid-range (between low-high case) valuation on Toondoon DSO basis (~$32m) - what DERISK have done is industry practice and was at arms-length. My reference to high-case $65m valuation was more so because in that scenario it is pretty much equivalent to ZEO's current market cap. I would think SH's &/or potential new investors would be interested in reading, so I provided link in my post.
“The opportunity to promote this company when the “green” thematic had traction has come and gone with no result. ZEO is the corporate equivalent of the Emperor with no clothes.”
Not so sure about the green/climate thematic having come & gone. The Australian Govt only released the Chubb Report (Mar 2023), followed by Safety Mechanism legislating companies with emissions greater than 100k equivalent tonnes of CO2 to have reduce emissions by 5% annually. My view is its only just starting and Companies that have exposure to GHG emission tech will prosper as long as they can execute – which ZEO needs to do and they have a range of projects that are climate tech centric. Your description regarding an Emperor has little to do with where ZEO is now IMO and the likes of Cleanaway & Covalent which are dealing with ZEO at the moment will ultimately decide if what it has is any good or not – ZEO needs to have this translated into something more than what it is today…but need to accept that’s the greater tangible investment risk (rather than 90m shares out of 1.6bn being sold – if (and agree it’s a big if) ZEO can deliver that amount of stock will swallowed up & most likely Goody or any holder for that matter will want to hang on…its classic market psychology)
As for what information you state your ‘privy’ too – I can only look back over HC last week, & you were close to the no.1 poster on ZEO with 6 post, which represented 50% of 12 in total you’ve ever posted on HC (with no holding in ZEO, apparently). All your posts repeatedly harped on about the negativity around legal proceedings and the company’s poor management team, so obviously something was behind that. Albeit, I do note the your frequency of posts commenced after the dumping around 2-3m shares at 3.9-4c last Tues (which the market promptly found the liquidity to absorb), so that may have rattled you &/or who knows (I definitely don’t) but maybe you are ‘privy’ to that sale (maybe you know who it was) or have some deeper understanding about the legal situation, saw you decide last week was the time to remind SH’s about a matter that was first announced to the market over 8 mths ago. I suppose we’ll never know.
For those of us that aren't 'privy' to anything but what's in the public domain, my view is rely on DYOR its the next best thing. GLTA
(20min delay)
