Our new website is coming soon, give it a try now and let us have your feedback. Take me to the Beta

Email Facebook Twitter

TSX Lithium explorer International Lithium Corp prepares to drill at Raleigh Lake
Exclusive: Hardman & Co Investor Forum - Severn Trent, Calculus Capital, Volta Finance, Residential

Member Info for tedoby

Send a private message to tedoby

Member Since: Sat, 3rd Nov 2012

Number of Share Chat Posts (all time): 405
Number of Share Chat Posts (last 30 days): 21

Last Posted: Today 07:56

Post Distribution over the last 30 days

Today 07:56

Jeremiah99 you've asked me quite a few questions in your most of which I'm unable to answer.
Unfortunately I'm neither a PDMR or a CAP for the purposes Article 19 of MAR so I've no idea if the £1m raised was spent on anything other than the categories we were given in the RNS.Viz:-

"Advance current exploration programme at Zulu;
Flowsheet optimisation through further bulk metallurgical testwork. Increase and upgrade the existing Maiden Mineral Resource Estimate
Advance discussions with strategic groups.
General working capital."

From what you've asked you appear to have assumed the Open Offer was to raise money for future drilling on Zulu when that's not what the RNS tells us or infers per sa. If I've misunderstood what you're implying I apologise. But if I have that right then given most of your other questions cascade from you view they become redundant.

FWIW I think the exploration programme at Zulu to date is easier to understand if it's considered in two phases. Phase one was done on the Main Zone and included 2500m of drilling to get us to Zulu’s Scoping Study.

Phase two was carried out to delineate the potential additional resource in newly discovered strikes and bring them up a SAMREC compliant resource. It included over 3600m of further drilling most of which in not all must have been completed at the time the money was raised in November. One of the strikes was an extension to the Main Zone but three were in Step Out Zones appropriately categorised at the time as SOZ's 01 to 03.

The Pegmatites in the Step Out Zones were shown to contain predominantly very high grade Li2O in Spodumene with very little Petalite and Lepidolite encountered. Assay results from ZDD-45 was particularly noteworthy where a length of Li2O having a bonanza grade in excess of 4% was identified.GR is quoted as saying “Not often is a grade of 4.24% Li2O seen in drill core” There would have been Tantalum present too no doubt but to date it's extent is undisclosed.

The additional strikes identified in SOZ’s 01 to 03 ran up to the boundaries of Zulu’s existing licensed area and by interpolation far beyond. This as well as a “walkover survey” of the adjoining land by experts could well have encouraged Prem to apply for the EPO we're now seeing. In his recent Proactive interview you may recall GR saying that he believed the additional EPO area was on strike as it was quite a significant and encouraging comment. If you take the additional area of 22,000 ha under application as having a similar density and grade of Li2O then Zulu if developed will be proven to be the largest hard rock lithium mine in the world. Not just marginally but as things stang by a factor of at least four.

So overall my personal conclusion is that the money raised in the Open Offer in November 2017 wasn't to pay for future drilling at Zulu and that it was used appropriately to pay for the categories of expenditure listed.

If on the other hand you believe Prems
Sat 19:41

Nice post Bottompicker and excellent appraisal of where we are.

If anything your post may be slightly conservative and certainly not as Wolframite chooses to misrepresent. Prem should also receive an income from it's Rental Agreement as well as it's Management Fee once RHA restarts. The amounts are undisclosed but if they remain unchanged the total should be in the region of £1m a year.

The filing of Prems AFS isn't late as Wolframite incorrectly propositions. It's under control and on track. It was predictable that Trolls like Wolframite would be misrepresenting the facts on the situation from about now. The accurate position remains as Prem reported in it's update in RNS 3762A . Viz-

"Premier expects finalisation and publication of the annual accounts on 28 June 2019".

The date for submission is nothing more than a maths calculation based the milestones stated in the RNS and necessary to stay fully compliant with the AIM & MAR regulations regarding not only the date for submission but also the minimum closed period required which is a 30 days.

Those recommending Wolframite's post should consider themselves as being mislead I'm afraid.


Wed 09:07

Elmwood because of their closeness in time and value they don't look like sells to me. Also they've had no affect on both sides of the book so I think they're more likely to be a t20.

Prem are in a closed period at the moment so I think we're unlikely to see the shares just issued being sold.


5 Jun '19

Fingers crossed CF!

4 Jun '19

bootieone I'm not sure where your information has come from. But apart from your comment regarding the price of MOP in my opinion it's mostly incorrect. Perhaps you should check it again with your source.

Some of what you've posted leads me to believe he or she may not have been in a position to give you the very latest information from the company which would explain it. Alternatively it could of course be mostly your opinion but you simply forgot to say.

Circum are due to issue a shareholder news letter imminently I believe and that should clarify the company's latest situation. Suffice to say I think you'll find Circums position appears to be far more positive and Prems shareholders are set to do quite nicely.


31 May '19

We could do with some mal. It's overdue!

Fingers crossed.
31 May '19

jessell you are a star in my view!

30 May '19

Moljen " an appropriate time" in what I said is key.

Without knowing the timing it's impossible for any of us pi's to say "when". You're quite right about the timing not being right at the moment but that doesn't mean to say that it couldn't be considered as part of any plans going forward or form part of discussions with potential Offtakers.

In my view Prem shouldn't be a plant hire company anyway. Neither should it be a lender to RHA in the way and to the extent it is if it can be avoided. Especially given it's in need of cash elsewhere.

Clearly my suggestion wasn't the best option anyway as it now seems the BOD have better alternatives..


30 May '19

I have suggested recently to the BOD's that they might look into the possibility of Assigning or preferably Novating Prems Plant Hire Agreement and/or its Loan Agreement in whole or in part to third parties on RHA at an appropriate time as a way of raising funds to finance Zulu to DFS .

There's probably close to $23m value currently locked in the two pre NIEEF's investment and nearer $18m afterwards when Prem matches it. Clearly releasing a reasonable part of that value would mean there would be no need for further dilution or taking on any debt burden at this stage. Hence my suggestion.

Having read the Proactive article this morning and as interesting as my suggestion was to management I'm now thinking there may be better options on the table or a possibility though. I've no Idea what they are. But I'm not altogether surprised to read of several Offtakers being interested in taking the Tungsten out of RHA and possibly providing finance as part of the deal.

It may be too early to say the same could be said on Zulu but it sounds the EPO if successful opens avenues for finance here too. It should go without saying how attractive the opportunity is in the lithium space regardless of the EPO result. But nevertheless if the news is very close it could change Zulu's drilling and finance plans dramatically even before they're announced.

There may be some form of security needed by Offtakers but I don't believe that should be too much of an issue even without Directors Guarantees. They're normally happy to take the position of preferential creditor status providing there's sufficient equity value and there's no bank debt or other senior debt position which in Prems case there isn't. I don't pretend to be an expert but in the cases I've seen their interest rates are only a couple of % above Libor so very attractive. I have seen sometimes a bond asked for which would mean the surety company taking a preferential position but even with that I can't see that being a problem either. There's evidence that institutions are moving their risk lines out in Zimbabwe and the commodities are sought after.

If finance is dealt with this way up to Zulu's DFS we have no dilution and keep the equity which at the current levels must surely be one of the preferred options.

AIMHO as usual

30 May '19

Smilemore the offtaker market has has changed as it always does.

You shouldn't be relating the new to the old when Noble fell into difficulty in the way your'e suggesting. There term agreement will have ended now and new blood seem to be expressing an interest.

I've given my views on the timing of what your doing before you started and I've seen nothing to change my mind.

28 May '19

Smilemore can I ask where you picked up this from please "Circum he 'feels' is not just a few weeks away." which you posted last Friday at 12:36. Was it simply from a post an hour before at 10:53 in which Moneytolose reported GR as saying:-

" I do expect that Circum will provide an update to all their shareholders in the next few weeks and I do think there will be a decent payday. Decent, could be as much as 100% gain. At $2.50 we would be talking $12,5 million?"

Having had the meeting with Circum why do you think GR went on to on to say this when really there was no need. No need at all. Could it be he wanted to exonerate himself if in the event there actually was a deal:-

"I am NOT suggesting there is any deal, I am just being demonstrative."

Pleas read GR's comments a couple of times before you comment.

25 May '19

Elmwood FWIW I imagine Prems BOD will see the merit on getting Zulu to DFS as early as possible. They won't be prepared to wait for sufficient positive cash to be generated by RHA or from thr proceeds of an asset sale to finance it I feel sure.

Some would have us believe that there isn't a market for Circums shares. I don't accept that. I can accept the fact that the BOD would prefer not to lose the benefit of the SP breaking out relatively soon on a corporate action event. Why sell at $1.50 when there's a step change to the price in the pipeline that could possibly take it to $3.00 they might say!

Prem is asset rich in many ways that haven't been mentioned on here ans seldom recognised. Many of them could be used to finance Zulu. There may not be a need to sell Circum shares unless of course there was a favourable offer on the table. Many of the alternatives although not all will cascade from the re-start at RHA. Of those that don't we may hear about a preferred having been selected any time soon.

Prems reason for not starting Zulu isn't all about finance and it's certainly not dependant on liquidating core assets or even getting another loan from GR's fund. How could it be could when the financial situation now isn't significantly different to what it was in February when an RNS confirmed we were to begin mobilising in readiness to start drill asap after the wet season . Hardly anything has changed financially since February and yet here many are imagining it's the reason.

KME not starting isn't all about the fall in the SP either although it would have unfairly disadvantaged KME in the agreed deal obviously. But that situation per se could have been easily been overcome. GR has commented further on it in his reply.

Negotiations to resolve the real issues were evidently work in progress at the time when site mobilisation should have started 3 or 4 weeks ago. It couldn't have started before because of the wet season. It was at that point when an RNS should have been issued saying mobilisation was running late and not before then in my view.


23 May '19

The report on Zulu's PEA isn't Prems.

It's BARA's and they're highly qualified Consultants approved under the SAMREC code. So it's hard to see them telling porky's

You could always write to them and tell them you fear is they're dishonest I guess as your libellous accusations seem cheap. Don't forget to include your full name and contact details though and to find that old tin hat out.
19 May '19

Smilemore I just thought I'd let you know I won't be one supporting your proposal. I don't agree with it.

Some of the issues your action is predicated on are quite valid but some aren't in my opinion. It seems some of us are influenced too much by what's been said on here and the other BB's and that's not good. Not good at all. To the extent that I believe some judgements have been based on inaccurate or misleading information .

Take the KMB issue for example and it's one of several. That's proven very difficult to resolve and I believe the situation is not what most think or have come to believe. Whilst I can see that the BOD's should have notified the markets that things weren't progressing sooner than they did they may have done that in the hope that negotiations on issues raised by KME could have been resolved amicably.

The drop in the SP wasn't the only issue KME raised. That one could have been sorted quite easily. There were other difficult issues too in my opinion that were not of Prems making and proved to be unresolvable in the final analysis. But arriving at that conclusion took time and I believe it wasn't for the want of trying on Prems part.

More than the KME issue and others like it and there are several I'm afraid the timing of your action couldn't be worse in my humble option. Prem is in the middle of important negotiations on all of it's three major assets at the moment. Zulu's with it's EPO, RHA's with it's $6m funding and Circums with any disinvestment. There couldn't be a worst time to be "airing dirty washing" in public.

This BB is a shop window into Prem and here we are raising this campaign in front of all to see at this critical time. I believe we could be jeopardising these really important negotiations if we follow through with your proposal. As well meant as I believe it to be.

So I may be a lone voice but I can't agree with what your doing Smile I'm afraid. I believe there's a far better time and place for what you and your supporters are doing .


18 May '19

spaceman07 I couldn't agree more .

For me Zulu sits in the quarter of a Boston Box that's marked "Urgent and Important". As such it should never have been or should ever be forsaken or neglected!


18 May '19

Sorry citizzzen I meant to say iii.com will almost certainly be charging you an exit fee as most brokers do. They're often calculated on the number of stocks you hold.

Broker sometimes offer to cover any transfer costs to attract your business. It may influence who you choose so I just thought I'd mention it.


Sign up for Live Prices
Top Recommended
Hot Chat Topics
Top recommended posters in the last 30 days

Member Login

Forgotten your password?


Don't have an account? Click here to Register Free!

Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.