Member Info for 4everlong

What % vote is required to get this through?

Didn't Leon confirm very recently that the Zambian development was "capital light" and required very little investment?

But now the sales proceeds only exceed the "short term" capital requirements!!!!!!

 Sale proceeds would substantially exceed Jubilee's short-term capital requirements for its copper business.

BB,

the Jubilee way is to utilize the phrases "up to" and "targeting".

That way you can't be held accountable for anything.

In my long business career I've never managed to conclude a deal by promising the seller "up to" on the purchase amount, (but in this case up to 70% of value) and still needing 3 years to pay!

@Happydays (hopefully in a few days your handle will be realised!)

The initial statements regarding the sale seemed to indicate quite clearly, that the only exposure we would have to Pgms subsequent to a sale, would be Tjate.

That part was reasonably unambiguous.

I wouldn't pin any hopes on retaining any stockpile at this stage, unless there have been subsequent negotiation.

3card I assume you meant to say they could buy them back at 3p, or the prevailing market price, and then give some back to staff at 1p as incentives?

I've seen that movie before. Jubilee shares have already shed 80% in value in the last 4 years. The company has been massively diluted. The implication is that if we don't accept the offer they might increase that to fund Zambia.

Another share that I had a decent portion of 2 years ago, sold the most significant and lucrative division in their portfolio, destroyed the value of the company and management awarded themselves millions in bonuses for the deal.

The share holders were left with crumbs.

Papi we are already in month 2 of the current FY.

8 months to installation takes us to month 10. At the very best we derive 2 months benefit of the 10k /pa (850tpm)

But, that assumes construction starts tomorrow.

If the deal does get voted through, the earliest effective date would probably be around December. 8 months takes the installation to August '27. That's the following FY.

The only way '26 sees any benefit is if bridging finance is raised on a yes vote and implementation begins almost immediately. It might be possible to see a month or two of the additional capacity at 850 tpm.

Idealistic overview on the transaction.

Plenty of assumptions, but posted in the interim pending the circular, just to visualize one of the better potential outcomes.

Assuming sale at $90m (with the new Pgm basket price shouldn't be lower, but hopefully has been adjusted upwards).

Assume $30 to $50m date of transaction

$20 to $30m x2 annual payments

I prefer $50m up front & 2 x $20m if selling price stays at $90m.

Year 1 (Current)

Jubilee derives all benefit to final date of transaction. Assume earliest transfer in 3 months, so sale concluded in November / Dec.

● +/- 50% of annual SA t/o to Jubilee (boosted by increased Pgm basket).

● Plus the $30- $50m deposit? Less any debt. Revolving credit so settlement shouldn't be very high. No confirmation of buyer assuming liabilities.

● Reduced overheads post transaction.

● Add 5100 cu (very conservative).

Probably closer to 7k plus.

● Focus on investment in Cu projects in Zambia.

● Massive ramp up in production in Zambia realised in year 2.

Year 2.

● > 15 - 20k Copper

● plus 2nd payment $20m - $30m unencumbered

● Continue Cu expansion

Year 3.

> 25k plus Copper

Plus 3rd payment $20 - $30m

Dividends possible at this stage.

Pure speculation of course.

If the spin drs try too hard to motivate for the SA sale in the circular I think we are looking at more pain. Enough damage was done with the first Rns. We can only hope that they don't try too hard to motivate for the sale by painting a gloomy SA picture that's going to unsettled the market further.

The share price has lost 33% since the announcement in June. Based on their own figures Zambia would be marginally viable as a stand alone entity at this time and needs 2 years to reach its potential. With 3.3bn shares in issue $20m ebitda is not going to help the share price.

Despite not having the details at this time, it would be hard to see any logic in the sale given the current Pgm basket price and consistent production of chrome.

In 18 months, when or if copper is at

> 1000 tpm, then it would make sense to transition fully to Zambia and build on that success.

With the company at a crossroads I don't believe getting rid of LC is the way forward. We need stability and consistency now more than ever.

The FD should assist with handling communications, etc, as LCs credibility is gone. They should both be on the roast etc. Either LC hasn't understood what's happening on the ground with his wild projections, or he is very economical with the truth.

I'm sure he is under enormous pressure hence the wild projections to appease the major shareholders but there comes a time when we need concise accurate information that the market can accept.

Despite all the negativity and disappointments, it's clear that Jubilee is currently being oversold.

Sentiment is the main driver here.

We are all disappointed with the performance from Zambia compared to the claims made by LC over the last years and particularly last year. Lack of transparency and vague wording has allowed the CEO to keep shareholders in the dark.

Many on this platform have invested more of their own money than he has. 1p options are a win-win regardless.

Once the dust has settled, I'm sure the share price will steady. Next week is the big one and we will know for sure which way this is going but it's going to be some time before we get to Eldorado.

@ Shuvlin. I don't think that's the issue.

The real issue is the continued misinformation and projections regarding Zambia from the CEO. The market has to believe what its been told. We did.

You will only have to spend 15 minutes going through previous RNS or Roasts etc etc to realise how little was based on reality. We ALL bought the story.

And here we are.

Lower forecasts despite more infrastructure and developments expenditure. Zambia is not sustainable for the next year without SA operations to cover costs.

Based on the RNS its hard to believe the sale is justified. If they had met targets and established credibility by achieving what was stated, we would have a different discussion. Then the sale might make sense. It's obvious now why we weren't given figures in the last few months of '25.

Correct Frog. Amazing bit of writing. If there wasn't a record of past claims and projections it would be believable.

I'm not sure how they think the company could sustain itself w/o the SA income.

Rns has just been released re Zambia

Well, it seems speculation will have to continue whilst we wait for the last week of July ('26?).

The spin doctors are hard at work justifying the "up to" $90m.

500tpm / 6000 pa that's certainly not going to compensate for loss of SA income.

1000 p/m would be required at time of the sale or there is going to be a significant lag in ramping up affecting the annual figure significantly. We are already in the 2nd month. We would be half way through the year before cash is received and then another 6 months before the benefit of the upgraded capacity is realised?

With 3.3 billion shares, we are going to need a lot more than $20m profit from Zambia after selling SA.

Dilution has a nasty effect on PE.

A share buy back with any additional funds might be of greater benefit than any potential dividend at this stage.

Not long now to be told we have found Eldorado.

LC becomes an overnight hero.

Today's sellers tell their grandkids what might have been if they had held on for a few more days 💰.

Interesting reply at 16:15 mark from LC.

Years of investment in SA ops are complete, and it's time to reap the rewards. (Or in this case, is it time for the buyer to reap the rewards?)

👍

Annnnnndddd Gotreals in the house!!!!

Let's get the insults flying. It was way to peaceful, and a bit boring earlier, with only a handful of insults. 😂