Hi
@number61
I think one day you will be an insightful and positive poster on this forum.
I'm going to treat you as I would any friend asking whether this was a good company or not.
What is the problem we talking about again (and again) here?
A requirement to extend one loan - by possibly as little as a few million dollars.
There are 3 months before this $16m is repayable. So why jump up and down about it now?
You already know the company is "working on it".
At 60% recovery production rates - 2-3 months of shipments and Galaxy may well already be onto Contract 2's $905/t price.
You'd have to concede that by then the acceleration in profits has moved Galaxy out of any degree of finance difficulty.
Hartley's was quoted here today. They show revenue of $148m and free cash flow of $107m by December.
http://www.galaxylithium.com/Investor/reports/151216Hartleys.pdf
Page 2
And this was their report from 15th December, already aware of all debt facilities but not yet aware that the plant was already starting at 60% recovery, well beyond the predicted/announced capacity.
(this is the problem with our broker reports - management keeps exceeding expectations and the brokers can't keep up.)
Today we have added 2 new directors. Did you get a chance to read their resumes?
One is from mining background at Morgan Stanley.
Another huge US bank.
The other a M&A specialist.
This is a company gearing up for some high level stuff now.
I've already mentioned a sticky Top20 that includes more than our fair share of international banks. And you already know that they began working on this issue at the end of October.
Now, I ask you as a banker - how difficult would it be for a company, set up this well with contracts and assets, to borrow against these earnings and assets, payback within months?
If I made 107k profit after tax this year - would you loan me 10k?
I'm going to resist the urge to present any comparisons to your other holding but let's agree that big promises have been made there to deliver some big results by the end of January.
You know exactly what I'm talking about.
We are talking about 2017 looking very different if they're not in place.
Even $10m dollars of extra finance does not change a thing for Galaxy.
We may have already picked up more than that by now expanding on expected production via improved recovery by by my estimate of 30kt.
We may not even need to pay it back with any great urgency.
But what may or may not happen at your other position - well that may well change everything about it's own future, timeline, path to finance, clients, even the possibility of building at all etc.
I believe that is why you, and a few of your friends, are shrewdly looking at Galaxy.
In a somewhat aggressive way - but fair enough. You've been put through the ringer too.
Hypothetically, as a banker, would you also agree that raising capital without production/profit is altogether a different ball game. Wouldn't you?
To your credit I think you've identified an issue with pre-payments that is often overlooked.
At some point a company has to deliver.
btw: As for an email contact. I'll set one up for the purpose soon.
I think I'd like to chat privately to a bunch of people here.
