Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I wish I was. Already emailed IR. Kind of curious if anyone on the board here has Jennings and Clarke's email and phone. If so, please post. Tomorrow morning is sure to be interesting. I'm almost certain the pps will drop, but have no idea how far.
Hey Vlisp - BAA, not good news out...delistment notice.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/banro-provides-corporate-011329916.html
Corporate Update News. Here's the link
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/banro-provides-corporate-011329916.html
Looks like longer terms can be agreed upon. Also doesn't list a min price, just that it needs to move in a positive direction. Hmmm...wonder what tomorrow will bring. 62% Institution Ownership is not going to want delisted.
Well, that's not good news. Banro better get their stuff together in the next 6 months.
Faz - I believe you use Fidelity...so just an FYI that you can call and they can help speed up that transfer for you. Buy it up son!!!
LOL...You fail to mention that the Big 10 currently has a winning (3-2) record against your beloved Pac 12 in 2015. 2 of those 3 wins have been some top dogs of the Pac 12, with both Oregon and Stanford going down.
The Big 10's 2 losses on the other hand...Utah over Michigan, and Washington St over Rutgers...Not exactly what I'd be bragging about as quality wins if I was a Pac 12 fan.
Dude...seriously? This is your comment from the post that started our conversation...
Also considering CIBC searched for months to find someone to pony up a mere 10million for this company earlier this year and was unable to shows just how hard it is for this company to access capital markets.
Maybe I am wrong, but I am assuming the $10M that you are talking about is what was announced in the Feburary 27th, 2015 press release announcing the $100M financing? If you are talking about another $10M that has CIBC tied to it from earlier this year, please provide the link, as I certainly don't recall ever seeing anything else this year where CIBC was finding "someone to pony up a mere $10 million".
So here is the link to the Feb 27, 2015 press release.
http://news.banro.com/press-releases/banro-announces-us100-million-financing-and-provi-nyse-mkt-baa-201502270994340001
and below in bold is directly from the end of the first paragraph.
The Company and its financial advisor, CIBC World Markets Inc., will seek to obtain commitments for the remainder of the gold stream transaction prior to the expected close in April.
Please tell me how your original comment still applies? Unless you are arguing that CIBC didn't actually help "seek to obtain commitments"? If that is your argument that CIBC didn't help I once again ask you to please provide a link.
TRUE!!!
Your lack of intelligence and inability to do any level of DD is clearly shown here on Page 42 of the .pdf under Management's Discussion and Analysis, section (v) Corporate Development. That's one of the problems with this board...just about anyone but the longs fail to do any sort of DD. They just spew numbers and opinions, and then names like Blue clearly mis-lead new investors that are on the board.
http://www.banro.com/i/pdf/2015-Q2.pdf
? In April 2015, the Company closed a $10 million forward sale to finance the purchase of the expanded mobile fleet.
The forward sale transaction provides for the prepayment by the purchaser of $10 million for its purchase of 9,508
ounces of gold from the Twangiza mine, with the gold deliverable over two years, at 396 ounces per month. The
forward sale may be terminated at any time upon payment to the purchaser of a one-time termination amount that
would result in the purchaser receiving an internal rate of return of 13%. The terms also include a gold floor price
mechanism whereby, if the gold price falls below $1,150 per ounce in any month, additional ounces are deliverable
to ensure a realized gold price of $1,150 per ounce for that month.
CIBC did get the $10M, so they had $100M total. $90 of it from Gramercy. I don't think there was a name put to the other $10M, but there was another forward sale done there.
I think overall the news is good. I am disappointed though (as many are) in that they had said they had enough money for 2 years, but blew through it in just a few months. I'm glad they have easy access to funding and forward gold sales, but at some point they need to keep the gold they are mining and be able to sell it when they please.
Here is something I've been pondering in regards to Namoya....is it possible that it is already in commercial production and it is just not being announced? My assumption would be that they don't have to announce it. I don't know if insiders are currently in a freeze or not, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were since we are only a few weeks away from Q3 production results.
Anyway, just a couple of thoughts with everyone wondering why we haven't heard anything, or when it is coming. Maybe we just get a big surprise come Q3 production results.
AEZS is a lotto play a best. Much better picks out there IMO.
Me too buddy! I am so ready for Namoya news!!!
True, but with a bit of a caveat for BAA. If gold goes down, we could still make money depending on how low it goes. The worst is that we have to deliver a few extra ounces in the forward gold sale...but assuming they can keep AISC down, many miners would have to cease operations if gold would drop to (let's say) $1,000/oz and stay there for a substantial amount of time. If by then we have the company pumping news, and looking for analysts, maybe more eyes would come to BAA and we could see the PPS rise even with gold going down. Just a thought...
LOL...HA...Imagine that...Keyotee's back on the first day gold really plummets...Where have you been oh mighty wise one...
Straight from iHub help. I'm going to believe the 60%+ number. I also feel good about the Morningstar site actually tying dates to their updates, so I know their info is recent.
Efren Q:
All the data for institutional ownership comes from the Security Exchange Commission (SEC). Each company has to file a form. You can see that data for BAA under the tab Financials. Under the CIK Number which in this case is 0001286597, it will give you all the filings done under that company.
Inst Ownership
I'm liking what I'm seeing with some of these updates to certain websites...The pps being dropped to this level and continually being held at this level are making a lot more sense.
Someone posted that iHub Inst Ownership now shows 62% which we've all probably confirmed. I also know that has changed from ~35% just a few weeks ago.
Furthermore, Morningstar also shows 62% Inst Own.
http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-overview.html?t=BAA®ion=USA&culture=en_US
Interestingly, Blackrock Funds Managers Limited owns 31.31% just on their own, which if I recall correctly is up about 10-12% from the last time I checked.
FinViz still shows ~57% Inst Own, but that one I don't think has changed in 8-9 months+.
I still do not understand how sites like Nasdaq can show 6% Inst Own. Yahoo shows ~33%, and that has been stuck in that area for a while now. It is also kind of weird that Martin (IR) said the company estimated 20-30% Inst Own...That is the same number he gave me months ago, but I also don't believe they are able to get a real accurate picture of who owns what. The reason I don't believe this is because way back in the Naomi days, she had indicated to me via email that many Inst's are not required to report...so while they knew the ownership was out there, they couldn't be certain of the percentage so they didn't include it in their numbers.
I've contacted iHub to see where they get their numbers from. I know that this is a recent update that they have made, so I'm curious how they got their data to essentially double the Inst Own percentage in a matter of a few weeks.
Very interesting 1 minute chart today. Someone keeps dumping and trying to break the share price down (possibly to initiate some stop sweeps), but the shares are getting eaten up in the mid-.18's.
I am just wondering if there is ever a time that London opens and gold goes up? LOL. I think 95% of the time there is a drop...the other 5% it stays flat. Too funny.
Stock - First, I agree with you completely that "early" in Q3 is gone.
This was the comment that I was really curious about:
The Namoya Summit has been cleared for delineation and is planned to be ready for production activities during the fourth quarter of 2015.
Thanks braised.
Nice...Well you must rate higher than me...He cc'd no one in his reply to me. I'm sure many are asking the same questions, but I'm glad to hear Inst Own is still estimated to be 20-30%, and not declining.
Here you go Faz...
A pretty quick response from Martin considering I just sent the email at the COB yesterday. This email provides reassurance IMO. The thing is, I've made my bed, and I'm comfortable sleeping in it. Unless management and IR are lying through their teeth, I don't see a concern with the bills that need to be paid.
In answer to your questions:
The one-time write-down at Namoya was triggered primarily by the fall in gold prices and was required by accounting regulations. This is a non-cash event that has no impact on our cash position or our strategy going forward. Secondary factors for the impairment charge were the impact of the recent financing terms, as the gold streams are not part of the consolidated debt but associated with the asset, and some indirect development costs associated with Namoya.
As for the bond payment: we have flexibility to allocate capital and take other steps to ensure that financial obligations are met as we move through the rest of the year.
I did reply to your question about institutional ownership some weeks ago. We estimate institutional ownership to be roughly 20 to 30 % of total holdings. Obviously, when we complete the operational turnaround of Namoya, we will taking our story to the markets and working to increase that percentage.
We appreciate that investors are not happy with the current share price – and neither are we. No company can control its day to day stock price. What it must do is have the right strategy in place and execute it well. This is what the Company is doing, as shown by our most recent press release. As we are in a position to announce more news about progress on various fronts – production at Twangiza, the ramp up of Namoya, exploration progress, etc, we believe that the market will better appreciate this and the stock will reflect it.
Regards,
Martin Jones
Hey Tex...Can you point to me where the quote you referenced is in their Q? I didn't see it in the Q2 ER, nor in the conference call transcript, but maybe I completely missed it...Thanks!
Hey braised. You've got a good understanding of the ER's, and I'm wondering if you can answer a question regarding all of their forward gold sales and how the ounces delivered would be shown on the ER.
With the $20M, $20M and $10M forward gold sales, there are 618oz, 618oz, and 396oz due per month, respectively. In addition, extra ounces are needed to realize a spot price of $1100 on the two $20M transactions, and a spot price of $1150 on $10M transaction. Just doing some rough math, Twangiza will have to give up ~5k ounces per quarter to meet the terms of the forward gold sales.
Will this still show in the gold produced, or are the ounces taken off of the top before reporting what they mined? What I'm really looking for is if this is why Twangiza guidance for the full year, doesn't line up with the ~35k oz per Q that they've produced in Q1 and Q2? Obviously if they keep producing that, they would blow their 125k oz guidance out of the water. The flip side though is if you take 10k oz off for Q3 and Q4 combined, then we are quite a bit closer to that 125k oz mark.
Hey Faz...My thoughts are that this has sure turned ugly, LOL. It's a little amusing how the sentiment on this board has done a 180 since the weekend...especially since gold has been holding over $1100. I'm still holding all of my shares, although I am now "in the red" overall. My thought is hindsight is always 20-20. Had I known we would've fallen back to these levels, I almost certainly would have taken short-term gains and paid the 30% taxes. That being said, my outlook for Banro has not changed.
I believe in the management team, and when they said in April that they had enough money to handle any liquidity issues for the next 2 years, I see no reason that they would be out of money a few months later. If in fact that would come true, that would be the poorest money management I've ever seen...especially since they've known about this payment forever.
There are a couple of things that I really didn't like in the Q2 ER. One is the impairment charge, I think that has everyone spooked...also, I don't know why they needed to show this in Q2 instead of Q3, as gold has averaged much lower prices in Q3 than it did Q2. I also didn't like how they said Namoya was on track for commercial production in September, yet other comments they made lead me to believe that it will be Q4 before commercial production.
Anyway, I guess we'll see soon enough. Only 6 short weeks until the end of Q3. Also, only about 1.5 weeks until their bond payment is due. I emailed IR today to ask for more clarification on the impairment charge, and why it was taken now. I also asked a few other questions, and about their estimate for institutional ownership since many websites are still varying significantly.
Are you in BAA, or were you looking to get in until Q2 ER? What other miners do you hold?
This part of the conference call makes me think that it will be Q4 before Namoya is in commercial production...If not Q4, very late Q3...Commissioning is done prior to production, and the "production activities during the fourth quarter" statement is a pretty dead giveaway.
At Namoya, for this third quarter 2015, we’re preparing for the delivery of the CAT 777 mining fleet additions in early September and commissioning in phases starting again in September. The Namoya Summit has been cleared for delineation and is planned to be ready for production activities during the fourth quarter of 2015.
So what does this mean? Namoya guidance was reduced when Q2 Mining Results were released, and it's projected to be between 60k-70k ounces for 2015. Through Q2, they've produced just short of 20k ounces, averaging ~10k ounces per quarter. Part of me hopes to see a substantial improvement in Q3 to show they are ready for commercial production, but part of me hopes they come in at the 10k ounces again, and then knock it out of the park with 30k-40k ounces in Q4. Of course, with only hoping for 30k ounces produced through 3 Q's, that brings in the risk that they might miss their guidance.
Sure would be nice if we'd get some attention on Jenning's book price of ~$4/share.
Conference Call - I'm very interested to know any highlights from the conference call, and any talk around Namoya, etc.
I wasn't able to call in today...but hope to see the transcript so I can read through it asap.
I'm sorry, but something just doesn't seem to be right here. -.19 EPS, I'm afraid, is going to drive this down tomorrow. I hope I'm wrong, but that is ugly.
I do not understand the impairment charge at all. The bottom did not fall out of gold until the last week or two of Q2. As we can see, they still received $1194/oz on average. Weren't all of their assets based off of $1200 gold? I hope I'm wrong...but if not, why the impairment charge in Q2 and not Q3? This kind of write down makes me even more nervous for Q3, since averages have been close to $100/oz lower in the first 6 weeks.
The second thing that bothers me is the AISC going up. That should be going the other way, and I can't come up with any reasonable explanation on why the AISC would've gone up, considering operational improvements, lower fuel costs, etc, etc.
Lastly, in regards to Namoya, they mention commissioning in September. They also mention commercial production in Q3, but now I'm afraid it's going to at best give us 4 months of commercial production. Who knows, maybe only the 4th quarter, plus a couple of weeks. Unless they are planning on some crazy-ass gold production in Q4 from Namoya, I have no idea how they are going to hit their guidance in 2015.
Let's see what tomorrow brings. Hopefully POG continues to climb.
Faz - I've been around buddy. I just don't watch every day. Been taking a lot of Friday's off work and getting some golf in. Still have all my shares, and still long.
The price action hasn't bothered me (keep in mind that ~70% of my shares were bought at $0.125). It is obvious that POG has not helped anything here. I still think we are in good shape. After .30 broke, I think a lot of people were stopped out. Volume now has dried up, and I think people are in limbo waiting for Q2 ER, and/or a clear direction in the POG. Longs are not greedy about a penny here or there, but day traders/swing traders certainly are...so they want in at Keyotee's .15 prediction.
As for Q2 ER, I still believe we will see .02-.03. As many have noted, they had some reserve ounces they could sell. Also, the total ounces mined was only slightly less than in Q1, but about 2k ounces less from Twangiza, but roughly that same amount more from Namoya. I'm guessing that we'll see that the average POG they received in Q2 will be in the $1180 range, as the bottom really didn't fall out of gold until right at the end of June. I think the big question will be on the extra ounces from Namoya, what did their costs get down to? If you recall in Q1, it was still costing them about $1600/oz. A significant decrease here would be very nice to see, and would also lead me to believe that a commercial production announcement regarding Namoya would be right around the corner.
Anyway, lets hope for gold to turn the corner. I believe we'll see Q2 ER before we see anything on Namoya. I think we see a Namoya announcement at the end of August or early September, but that is just a guess based off of the guidance they gave for 2015 H2 production from Namoya.
Apparently you've failed to follow Keyotee for too long. Months ago he continued to call for BAA sub .10...That call wasn't exactly spot on I would say...
But hey, if we can make predictions that people will give credit for months or years after the fact...
Yeah, I'm not too worried that I didn't exit. I'm trading in a brokerage account, so I'm subject to ~33% taxes on my profits. My .125's sure looked pretty in that .38-.40 range though. LOL. Only 5 more months and then I'm down to 10% taxes. Maybe we'll see .75+ by December. That would be a nice Christmas present for me.
Where do you think the bottom is for gold? Think we are there, or still further down? I've still got all my BAA. Was painful to see all the profit I gave up on taking, but I still believe Banro still does well long term. Just kind of been a few boring months with my stocks since I have no dry powder. LOL.
I don't think the purchases of the trucks (assuming they used some of the $90M) would have any impact on the EPS. Braised mentioned at one time that the $90M would not positively impact earnings, so I don't know how buying equipment with that money could have a negative impact on earnings? I'm not an accountant either, but that wouldn't make any sense to me.
I think we'll still see a positive EPS in the .02-.03 range. I think the real question is, what price did they get for the gold they sold? If you look back, they only received $1208 average in Q1. For Q2, the price wasn't a whole lot lower with exception of the last week of June. So I'm guessing we'll see that they received around $1190 average.
Are you sure they will soon? How soon? I'd be patient over the next couple weeks because your "soon" may never come if $1100 holds.
Also, have you done any calculations to see how much impact this would really have? It's not really that much, although I hate to see it come off the bottom line. However, there could be a silver lining if the POG stays low and more eyes get onto BAA while other miners fold or cease operations due to the POG.
I ran the numbers for the $20M financing at $1000 POG. For Banro to deliver gold to Gramercy to realize a price of $1100 POG, Banro would have to deliver an extra 61.8 ounces in a month. So double that for the two $20M deals.
I certainly think the question is worthy of asking. I personally overlooked it as possibly being the same issue that Twangiza faced, as when I read the Q2 Mining Results I interpreted the reason for the minimal stacking to be due to other issues, rather than a stockpile that was too wet.
Below is the excerpt from the PR that addressed the decrease in stacking levels at Namoya in April. The section in bold led me to believe that this wouldn't have been an issue had all their materials and supplies been on hand, but I could be totally off-base.
The significant decrease in stacking levels from March's 103,163 tonnes to April was also driven by the adverse impact of unseasonably high rains which interrupted supply routes and the ability to deliver procured materials and supplies. The availability of ore from mining activities and the available medium grade stockpile material resulted in the stacking of ore with an average grade of 1.52 g/t Au.
One thing I know for sure in the years to come, I'm going to watch out for April. Q1 is historically the wet season, but April these last 2 years has really thrown a wrench into their production. At least this year it only caused a minor delay. Last year, on the other hand, was a kick in the beans.
There are a couple of small issues with your figures, specifically regarding the Namoya part of the equation. First, the AISC at Namoya is not going to be $581 (yet). Hopefully they get there in the coming Q's, but they were at ~$1600 per ounce at Q1. I see no way that they've trimmed $1k off of that.
Also, the ounces you've subtracted from Namoya may not be true yet. I have never seen a set number of ounces per month that were to be delivered for the $50M from Namoya. The following is straight from their Q1 ER:
The streaming transaction provides for the payment by the purchaser of a deposit in the amount of $50 million and the delivery to the purchaser over time of 8.33% of the life-of-mine gold production from the Namoya mine (or any other projects located within 20 kilometres from the current Namoya gold mine). The ongoing payments to Namoya upon delivery of the gold are $150 per ounce.
Unless I'm misinterpreting this or have missed other info in their filings, Banro only needs to provide 8.33% of the life of the mine production, and has no monthly commitment for delivery. Anyway, I guess the way I interpret this is that they have the freedom to not deliver anything now, and then they can make up what they are missing once Namoya's AISC is lowered and is operating efficient commercial production.
How do you figure production results were not all that great? They produced ~300 oz less than their record production in Q1.