It seems to be a law of nature that the best mineral deposits are located in the worst possible jurisdictions... or perhaps that's just the function of human nature that tends to value more that which you can't have ? But, as a price function, certainly, the same thing in locales without the risks will be a lot more expensive.
Market driver in ZIM appears to be an improved recent performance, elevating expectations re future expansions in the predicted yield, from a trailing 2.69% at $0.41US to a forward 7.21% rate at $1.10. It has a record date of Feb 18. I don't see where there are changes noted other than in the changed forward guidance without any other adequate reference. Company website has the divvie announcement, showing they will pay $0.41US on March 5th.
The shift in shareholdings and some of the element in the risks is extractable from the history on the website which I have reformatted and highlighted. I have no particular skill, nor any particular interest, in trying to parse the nature of the country risks in Zimbabwe. I agree with you, I suspect, both in that the nature of the risks inherent require a higher return to compensate for those risks, and in thinking the compensation doesn't actually obviate the risks nearly as well as choosing to avoid them.
So the rest is an exercise in general curiosity rather than about specific investment interest. My initial wondering was about why it was listed in Aussie markets versus others. I did find there is a US listing, but its on the pinks, as ZMPLF, where it trades lower than on the AX with a current yield of 3.82% vs. 2.69%, although showing roughly the same forward rate change at $0.83 and a very American forward rate of 7.76% vs 7.21. It trades an average of 251 shares a day, so if anything ever goes wrong... you're stuck... a massive amplification of the holding risks for which a small bump in rates can't compensate.
The half year report does show a big change in performance... but it also gives no reason to expect a near term increase in the payout. It does contain a point of utility in making comparisons with others: "Six elements (platinum, palladium, rhodium, gold, ruthenium and iridium), 6E mill head grade at 3.49g/t."
What the website shows is that ZIM remains ZIM, only with Impala now as a very large shareholder. I'd have to look at Impala more closely to see how much of a % in total risk that represents, or how much that risk might be diluted by other Impala holdings... but Impala as IMP.JO has similar trading risks in its two US listings and a lesser yield, so the market likely answers those questions without a need for any more work.
History:
In 1998, Delta de-merged its platinum interests into a special purpose vehicle; Zimplats.
Shareholders in Zimplats:
Implats currently holds 87% of Zimplats.
2002 - 2005:
-Implats-87% shareholding
-Open Pit Mining (2.2Mtpa)
2006 - 2009:
-36% ground released to Government
-340m Phase 1 expansion project (mining and milling up to 4.2Mtpa)
-504m Phase 2 expansion (mining and milling up to 6.2Mtpa)
2010 to date:
-Zimbabwe Platinum Mines (Private) Limited issued a 10% equity stake to the Zimplats Employee Share Ownership Trust as part of its Indigenisation implementation plan (IIP)
-Launch of CSOT (Community Share Ownership Trust)
-Bimha Mine precautionary closure
-Bimha Mine redevelopment
-P6 Replacement mine project |
