Zanaga Iron Ore Company Limited Share Price (ZIOC)

We've just had the 'first reveal' - acknowledgement of the existence of a 'concert party' - which begs obvious questions like 'Who else? , To what end? and 'How far back?

There's a lot of material to be mined (geddit?) from AT and MK's InvestorMeet disclosures, aka the'teach-in'.

MK .." After long due diligence processes with many other interested entities, RAM [Ed.: incorporated 19 Dec 2025] has now completed the technical, sovereign, and financial due diligence processes with our technical partners [Ed.: who they?], resulting in this transaction...."

AT.."We have to admit that the complexity of this transaction takes a bit of time to understand and wrap one’s head around...."

MK: .."We have shared these [workstreams] with our partners in the Republic of Congo — both at domestic and government levels — and our project partners [who are these partners???] and consultants [ditto] are ready to commence this work..."

MK:... “David — you asked whether the FEED and FID work programme could complete earlier than 18 months.

We would certainly like to. But these are required steps. Whether we were talking about this in 2019, 2023, or now in 2026, the work has to be undertaken in a certain way and takes a certain amount of time.

We have been working with the same project partners for 18 months...." [Ed.: ie Q2/Q3 2024].

The 6 May 2026 RNS (precursor to the latest fundraise) says

Workstreams now completed include:

· The confirmation of DRI product quality potential for both Stages;

· The completion of costing and feasibility of:

o modular hematite processing facilities ;

o thickened and dry tailings facilities for both Stages; and

o an optional single 30 Mtpa pipeline during Stage One (providing a COMPELLING alternative to the April 2026 case two-stage pipeline plan)*

· Update of specific project costs through an OEM enquiry process

· Assembly of a Constructor Engagement Programme for the Project.

* the presentation here is (deliberately?) misleading, since it downplays the economic difference.... and allows ZIOC to present a lower-than-expected 'new' NPV

The schedule can be recast as

Stage1 $M Stage2 $M

Twin Capex 637 1,343

Twin Opex 915 1,724

Total Twin 1,552 3,067

vs

Single Capex 986 986

Single Opex 659 774

Total Single 1,645 1,760

to show that a single pipeline SAVES $357M Capex at Stage2...and SAVES $950 M Opex.

''Big mistake'.

Key takeaways from the above:

- there's been a lot of technical, financial and sovereign engagement, behind the scenes, for a lot longer than previously presented;

- we've been working with the same partners and consultants since Q2/Q3 2024;

- the drop in NPV is a presentational choice.

Cont...

I pontificated while under the influence of a very nice bottle of South African Chenin Blanc/Grenache Blanc - a rare combination in itself! Followed by a stunning Barbadillo Manzanilla - I could smell the sea! You don't have to shop at Waitrose but it helps!

Subsequently, extrader pounced! If a temporary trading suspension would advance the cause of long-suffering LTHs then I'm all for it!

Unfortunately, even rumours of a trading halt will lead to a slump in the SP but it's up to individual carpetbaggers.

.."Who would suffer more from a trading suspension? Hopefully the RAM raiders - if not financially then reputationally. "

You have to cast your net a bit wider and include the various 'enablers', collaborators and symapthizers.

To coin a phrase ' You're gonna need a bigger boat'.

Jes' sayin', like.

"Glencore and ZIOC thought a fair price was 4.2p, did you completely miss that ?"

You are being very disingenuous millerston!

It was a fair price for GLEN's holding AT THE TIME bearing in mind circumstances would change!

Obviously, it certainly never put a future value on the Zanaga Project.

As does not the current SP!

You may recall that, at the time, GLEN was perceived by some to be a barrier to any development.

Feeks: I share your view of the RAM raid but suspect the longer term will outlive me! Good luck to you if you're still here to make serious money from your ZIOC investment. At the same time, I certainly wouldn't welcome a mandatory offer of 11p! On the other hand, if the SP were to be stuck around 4p for the next few years 11p looks very attractive! It's such a shame that the ZIOC BOD feels so little empathy with LTHs - we're just irrelevant cannon fodder and it's extremely unfair. I hope extrader succeeds in getting any kind of financial authority to suspend trading in ZIOC while "fairness" is debated. Who would suffer more from a trading suspension? Hopefully the RAM raiders - if not financially then reputationally. "I see you tried to screw the small shareholders but came unstuck! Definite lack of judgment! Not sure I want to do business with you again!" If only... I suspect the actual response will be along the lines of "You win some, you lose some!" with much back-slapping.

Not all BODs treat shareholders with such contempt: as a shareholder of LOGP my interest in the company at the time of suspension has been ring-fenced as regards any future compensation. That was very fair. And very unusual.

Hi Feeks,

.."I would be much happier to see the RAM deal voted through as I would like the chance to realise a much bigger gain over the longer term with construction funding being secured through positioning of the RAM entity.."

I think there's a basic misunderstanding here: under the RAM transaction - and the latest Fundraise - ZIOC shareholders Stage 1 fund the Project next steps.

The value resulting will accrue at Project level.

Under Stage 2, RAM will /may pay 'us' $ 125M, which 'we' will have to re-invest if we are to keep 'our' 12.5% of the Project.

But we (= ZIOC) are now controlled by a Greymont consortium that overlaps significantly with the RAM shower, we don't know the extent of the overlap.

Suppose the Greymont consortium + Guava etc already have 75% of ZIOC.

When RAM 'pays' ZIOC $125 million to fund its 12.5%, 75% of that spend goes back to the Greymont consortium + Guava.

Imagine a Stage 3: For simplicity's sake, suppose ZIOC has 1 billion shares and we received a 'third party' offer from another unidentified gatecrasher for 100p (a slight discount to the 0.3x Kami NAV read-across).

That would 'cost' the offeror £ 1 billion, but under certain circumstances could cost the 'offeror' a LOT less on a 'net outlay' basis.

It might also make a 'generous' 'take private' outcome more attractive, given the same arithmetic ...and an elegant solution to some of the issues that ZIOC will otherwise face.

That's my working hypothesis

HTH

NAI, DYOR, etc etc

GLA and ATB