WOW ! Step off it for no longer than a day and look what becomes of what is supposed to be an Investing forum where we converse on the Companies technical's and fundamentals as well as comparative past , present , and future valuations based on ALL these supposedly constructive / productive discussion.
And I say technical's and fundamentals because as far as I am concerned they are intrinsically related and one in the same - with only the perception of others who makes these claims with after today looks only to beat their chests in attempting to inflate their own ego's and increase their seemingly desperate attempt to increase their notoriety.
I'll come back to the ' Technical's ' v ' Fundamentals ' later in my posts , but lets just stress test the veracity of their claims first. One of the funnier things I have heard from one of these posters was the statement where they claimed that the 3rd and 5th announcement involved with a ' Wave 3 ' and Wave 5 ' technical movement are " more potent " that that of a 2nd and 4th announcement.
I mean what a load of Malarkey ...LOL. So I guess this poster should have stated the obvious that the ' Next ' announcement which will now no doubt be AFTER the obvious wave 4 we are now in , and of course will equally obviously be the catalyst for the HUGE wave 5 that of course we are all already expecting could be dropped at virtually any moments notice from now. However at the same time , it could also be a mediocre or crap announcement for all we know.
Anyway its interesting how some of these Guy's are quick to jump on others when they themselves swing in and out of accountability for their claims. Like for example when questioned about the claim of the SP not falling back after T+1 after the CR details were released, could not or did not want to be held to a comment because the trade had obviously gone against their claim.....and they had no answer or reason for this. But hang on ....I was under the impression that these chartist's look at the shorter term charts including the 5 minute ones etc....etc. I mean I do......
So I find it really hypocritical that a chartist has a no comment or a reply like ' what do expect me to say' after only 1 day '. How many days do you need to figure it out. So virtually 3 days had transpired following the CR details whereby trading gains were obtainable at the rates of 13.4% , 10.1 % and 4.57%. But no surprise really that you don't see them until today when the re-trace trend has already been confirmed. And how many post were there today from just this one poster verses say yesterday when it only just tripped down in the back half of the trading session.
So to me , it seems all they want is to claim is that the SP was now falling back to near the CR pricing as they claim they claimed 3 days earlier , and while serious money was still being made.
And to those who just keep insisting that this is just the way it is and will always be need to understand just how wrong they can actually be. I'd like to see some of them tell us all how it was that SZL received what amounted to a 4.5% strategic placement stake from Discover Financial Services for US $30 million @ AUD $8.83 equivalent share price which in turn equated to a 10.9% premium to the yesterday's closing price of $7.96. And it finished up 5.15% when it's whole peer sector including APT and ZIP both close down another 2.2% and 5.56% on top of additionally large losses yesterday.
So the ' Mould ' of perceived expectations can in fact be broken when the Market feels it appropriate and likes the timing. And Sayona is really no difference because as yet we do not know where and or who's hands these Institutional shares have landed in.
But lets just come back to what I had stated in a post some time ago , and that is for me , it's all about Fundamentals , Research , and Valuation FIRST and charting ,confirmation , or validation SECOND.
And so lets use the last CR raise which was similar in size by share issue quantum , and only slightly different by dilution comparisons. So last raise was for 638,443,876 New Shares and a 16.67 % dilution whereas this current raise is for 600 million new shares and around a 12 % dilution overall. So less shares , less dilution , ......but with 245% more capital being raised.
So why should all of this be important ? Well, if we merry up the comparative price points in the last raise to the similar market price points which have already been confirmed leading into the current raise , we will find some interesting correlations. And why shouldn't we , because if we apply the ' Golden Rule ' principles which underpin the whole Fibonacci principles which include the calculation of Pi., you will find that there is a interconnecting link between your well research FA and the pricing which reflects this value.
So if you think of the TWO price points along a line or ' Wave ' - in this context you will find there was a reason that 4.3 - 4.4 was a significant initial price hurdle following the 1 for 6 rights issue raise. Because the ' TERP ' ( Theoretical Ex Rights Pricing ) of 3.8 cents was exactly the mid-point average between the 4.4 and CR pricing of 3.2 cents.
Similarly as the valuation comparisons unfolded over several announcements , and as previously stated in a range of 6.5 cents ( lower ) and 8.9 cent ( higher ) SP and MC valuation as proven out and validated by various valuations methods , it should be no surprise then that Management selected a similar discounted pricing of 7.5 cents which is again virtually the mid-point average of those value SP price points. And all you have to do is ask yourselves where we have momentarily ended up........virtually spot on the 7.7 -7.8 cent price which the Market had ALREADY validated from numerous confirmation's around those previously predicted 6.5 and then 8.8 - 8.9 cents levels. And when I say previously predicted , I believe on evidence of posts you will find that it was I who in fact FIRST posted and suggest these price points based on researched valuations.
So I guess there is really only one thing left to say on top of all this and that is in relation to the previously stated fact that coming off the 10 cent $500 million previous approx share price , a one cent price fall in the SP was more or less equivalent to $25 million loss of MC value. A 1.5 cent drop in SP is therefore around $75 million , and a 2.5 cent drop down to CR pricing is around $125 million.
So when you stop and think about this , I'm not so sure that Lynch would have by design intended the capital raise to discount the inherent value of the NAL / Sayona Quebec project by $125 million but moreover give these new Investors the opportunity to buffer themselves with what amounts to just over 20% potential starting return when. And all normal , and ALL reasonable in reflection of the previous 1 for 6 rights issue raise where it had also pitched itself at an 18% discount to the last closing price of 3.9 cents prior to that particular raising with its similar statistical attributes. ie quantum and dilution.
So obviously that's a BIG yes to the poster who had called me out today on my previous prediction of a ' Doubling ' of SP in a months time. I stand by this claim and so will be endeavoring to counter intuitively trade and apply for the full allowable $30 grand cap allocation based on the obvious fear which has been contrived by this situation.
Now this post was long enough , so I've got another couple of posts ready to go covering other issues which haven't as yet been discussed - but I will just hold off on those for the moment while l the dust settles and we ease into a more structured direction in the current discussions.
(20min delay)