I must admit I get a bit confused by the sentiment around here sometimes. I think @Scarpa put it very well as usual.
"Now for AVZ to maintain teh momentum it must sign more offtakes, get funding and FID sorted out and start construction no later end Sept quarter 2021 if wants to be in production in 2023. If those timeline are missed then SP will drift down is my point, but if hit SP moves up is my point, an obvious point. As I said the market is forward looking."
So the key here for the market to have confidence in AVZ and the SP to reflect this is to meet the deadlines in the table posted in the latest investor update. (or at least come close)
If this happens I can't really see why theoretically we couldn't achieve a SP of around 50c by April given that OT #1 and a couple of minor updates increased the price by around 100%. According to Nigel were expecting another 7 Ot's and according to the table licencing and approvals should be completed within the same time frame which should usually increase the SP a further 7% on average according to the best figures I could find for a rough reference.
Even if further OT's only increase the SP by say 15-30% depending on size and we don't get all 7 in the time frame we still could come close to a 50c price. *if targets are roughly met.
On the flip side if we fail to meet these targets we can expect lower performance and loose the cumulative effect some momentum would provide. Hence then it becomes doubtful we could achieve anything like 50c by April.
My reading of the situation of late (rightly or wrongly) is that some holders seem resigned to the fact that we won't meet these targets and are happy to patiently wait for the targets to be met as management keep kicking the can down the road and releasing new timetables periodically. Personally my expectation is they should set themselves realistic targets and do their damndest to stick by them, surely a no brainier in terms of good business practice.
Given our resource repeated missed milestones might be okay in the long term but some of us might be dependent on some profit taking at some point to de-risk our holding or move some money elsewhere, pursue other opportunities etc etc. That's why we might be preferable to management sticking to their timeline as well as the fact that this would build trust and provide the best long term outcomes for the company overall if they did.
Sure we could sell but with the promise of imminent progress this option isn't really appealing right now. Let's hope the promise is real this time. I'm not trying to downramp here, just simply putting it out there that different holder's have different agenda's and targets and that management should be held responsible for meeting or not meeting theirs not just releasing them willy nilly to appease shareholders for the short term. That isn't the sort of company many would like to be a part of. Most in my small portfolio do consistently better.
As has been repeatedly said, now is the perfect storm for this company to really take off.
Management know the figures they need to achieve within their offtake agreements and if they don't they really should, besides these figures can and will be re assessed after initial agreement time frames as in OT #1. Conveniently shortly after the loan payback period and just in time for bigger profits.
They need to now push them across the line in a timely manner. Not that simple I'm sure but on the other hand that is their job and the timeframe to achieve these targets was set by them.
I personally believe they are doing a good job but I am not yet convinced that they are setting realistic goals and mildly apprehensive of the negative SP impact this may cultivate. I'd very much like to be proven wrong on that. Looking forward to the news flowing and goals getting kicked. The hard part of actually building a mine in the DRC is sill to come, no rest until it's done & hopefully on time.
All imo and not advice just a one man's perspective.
