BPL - fundamentally undervalued, do you think?

First off, got to say that I used to have a holding of BPL because of my holding in NTL. NTL used to own 19% or so of BPL. You might notice that Matt Hill and Geoff Hill are connected to both NTL and BPL by directorships and shareholdings. I have been enjoying NTL's run from a $4m company to a $40m company about now. It took 12 months. I am following the management that has made me money.

So, my question, is BPL undervalued?

Here's the steps that I took to reach my own personal conclusion that it is undervalued.

The starting point for me is that recent announcement that BPL had reached agreement with another party to accept payment of about $3.1m in exchange for some permits and to settle a dispute:



The next step is that BPL holds 49% of the cobalt project held by COB. Whether or not the JV will be completed by COB is a question for another day (they have 8 months to hit 40m indicated - tick tock) but for the time being BPL still holds the 49% interest:



We also know that BPL has its own projects. I have a reasonably robust understanding of the projects but for brevity there's a summary from a recent announcement:



The last step before the great reveal is the idea that the shareprice itself has floated around the 2.8 cent support/resistance mark for a few weeks now. I wonder whether a reversal is possible, particularly if I am right and the market catches on:



So at 2.8 cents BPL had an MCAP of about $4.1m. This appears to me to be less than the cash it has or expects to have in the near future once the settlement funds are paid to it. The MCAP does not take into account that BPL still holds 49% of the cobalt project and given the aspirational amended JV terms I wonder whether it will get the cobalt project back:



So, my view is that BPL is fundamentally undervalued. On a 1:1 cash/market valuation of COB and the HMS project (whatever it's worth) I reckon BPL might revisit 9 cents or so on the chart to get back to a more reasonable shareprice.