@Mutley8 ............."You are all messed up between US and AU dollars "
Considering the numbers I use come straight from the company announcements you are basically stating the company has their numbers all wrong.
What many shareholders here fail to realise is that having a plant or even 50% of one does not add value to the company by itself. There are plenty of companies in all sorts of mining/processing ventures that have plants, yet the market values the company very low. For example there are companies like POS that have several hundred million dollars worth of 'plant' yet without a profitable resource to run through the plant, the whole company is not worth much.
Here, to buy the plant needs millions the company does not have, just to get to 50% ownership. Then many more millions ($US10.5M or $A14.8M) to get the plant operating.
All those millions need to be raised to get the plant to be 'worth' the $U70M. Without a successful cap raise (or 2) the company has nothing, no plant and no exploration tenements.
The market prior to the cobalt venture in the DRC valued all the other 'assets' at 0.1c/sh.
If I'm so wrong, then why are so many shareholders upset and resort to name calling, instead of just using company announcements, numbers and fully diluted market cap information??
A lot of information is in the public arena, and just does not look very good for any potential investor to take up the new prospectus. Assuming the $10m raise gets up, a potential investor can see fully diluted MCap of $A84M, yet the assets of the company will be 50% of a plant $US16.5M = $A23.5M (@71c exchange rate), some unproven exploration tenements, plus some contracts with unproven DRC companies to provide ore (cost unknown, record of companies unknown)
None of that would entice most sophisticated investors nor institutions IMHO.
A prospectus also should contain some forward looking financial parameters, like cost of operation, profitability etc, but this information can only be included if it comes from Independent Experts, not just from the company itself. Without such information in the prospectus, why would anyone invest??
WFE have not indicated they have engaged any IEs to do any of this work, why not?? It should have all been done last year, just like the facility valuation should have been completed very quickly after the idea was first acted upon.
WFE do not have any offtake agreements, let alone any prepaid ones, despite one shareholder constantly claiming differently!!
The long ongoing suspension is also not good in terms of getting people to take up a prospectus IMHO, because people do not like seeing their capital tied up for long periods. The original TH/suspension was only meant to last a week or so, yet because the company did not go about this large change in the ASX accepted manner (feasibility study) it has remained in a long suspension.
I'd expect many existing (trapped) shareholders to want to exit quickly, and that would by itself, be another reason to not invest in the new prospectus (early selling pressure ).
@Mutley8 ........"So what is the company worth as a cobalt producer?"
Being a 'cobalt producer' by itself is meaningless. If they can't show they will be making a profit, then the answer is not much. If the numbers show they would make a loss at current prices, then the whole concept is worthless IMHO.
None of us know where the price will go over the next year or 2. They could go up or down or just sit around the current level.
