Member Info for 4everlong

Great idea Chatmandu. Definitely a good solution given the context here.

🥱🥱

Seis that's a pathetic response from someone who has been given such high status / recognition on this platform. I wonder if you too are directly connected to Jubilee, and not simply a shareholder with technical expertise as implied.

You have chosen to ignore what I said, and as many here, just deflect. Although I will add you don't normally make it personal, or resort to insults when out of counter arguments.

I suggest that you stick to your skill set.

@bottoms

How did you make the jump from a basic email communication being relayed, (not verbatim - minus pleasantries etc) and a communication relating to a company placing?

That's a bit of a stretch in anyone's language.

No one is suggesting the response needs to be verbatim, but if its relevant share it.

If you tell a group that you have been given information, but then you refuse to share it, DON'T be surprised at the response you get from other members.

I just don't get the mentality of some on this board, who advise they have been given information, but then refuse to share it.

Seis I'm looking at YOU. Your response that you have been told what it is, but we must ask ourselves, is churlish.

You then wonder why there is rampant speculation. I don't get the logic of those statements.

It is as if JMK told me, but he might not tell you.

My bs radar is flashing on red line.

My point was, that if JMK provides relevant information in reply to a question, that I can see no reason why other shareholders cannot be advised of the response. It makes no sense that each shareholder has to ask the same or similar questions from management.

There is no nda agreement wrt shareholder communications. The response when given, is in the public domain. If the question cannot be answered then that could be relayed as well. It's really not a difficult concept.

I don't expect JMK to directly post information on this platform, but responses from him as a result of specific questions, can simply be relayed to members here. This could go a long way to neutralize random speculation on this board as a result of confusing comms from management.

Clearly if the response is not positive, and could have a material impact on the share price, the information would be withheld.

I hope that this is not the reason for some members here not willing to share information, after stating that they have received a response to their questions but refuse to share it.

JMK does read posts on this platform and if any information sourced from him is corrupted or inaccurate he can state that.

This would go a long way to reduce the amount of random posts creating confusion, and speculating on the current status.

Morning Frog.

I'm looking forward to the "up" part!!

It's long overdue!!!

My initial buy in was @ 15p unfortunately. Topped up too many times since buying into LCs story. So please excuse my frustration.

Despite the past, I am STILL a believer but have to accept we are operating off a much lower base. I do respect the work that JMK has to do in turning this ship around, but its been a frustratingly slow process.

Leon was always very convincing on the Sunday Roasts etc but he was clearly " writing cheques" he knew he couldn't cash.

I haven't seen too many upsides since buying in, so I am really looking forward to the experience. 🙈.

I'm hoping its sooner rather than later!!

In my opinion, although there was very strong competition yesterday, the award for the most ridiculous post goes to......

(Drum Roll please maestro) .........

The award 🏆 goes to Shuvlin.

Well done sir!! 💪💪. There was stiff competition but YOU did it!!!!!

The winning quote was :

☆☆☆☆☆

Virtually all LTHers of JLP had a huge opportunity to make money on them if they were clever enough to sell around 20p and buy back. After that one could not blame the company for the drastic fall in PGM prices which hit everyone. The only time to apportion blame will be if the copper strategy comes to nothing. Until then i reserve my judgement.

☆☆☆☆☆

Well done sir!!

Let's ignore any investor who invested in the last 4 years and has lost 80% of his investment. Let us all ignore for a moment, the many statements made by Leon that brought us here, from 20p to 3p, and then kept us topping up. 50k copper plus 2m Chrome plus 48k Oz Pt.

Who wouldn't have bought into the share price at any stage in the last few years given the numbers spewn out by Leon. 25k Cu was a dead cert by now combined with Pt Chrome etc. The share price was a gift in the last 2 years based on his statements.

We believed, and continued to buy into the story, but as per Shuvlin, that's on us!! 🤡🤡

Right????

I don't agree Dru.

While JMK has every right to "monitor" this board, posters / shareholders are fully entitled to voice their opinions. Management are accountable to share holders, not the other way around.

If some of the information posted here is incorrect based on an interpretation of an unclear RNS, and not a deliberate attempt by the poster to sow doubt, that is on management.

There can be no reason why an answer to your email questions regarding Jubilee, couldn't be relayed to other members unless the information is only relayed to key members. That would be a greater concern.

It's time to get rid of the smoke and mirrors on here and cut to the chase.

There can be no selective dissemination of information. That would be highly irregular. If you are given information, its in the public domain and should be heard by all.

Hi Dru / JMK

Serious question.

Wouldn't it make sense if you have asked a question that, as you stated, is asked by many on this platform that it would be in everyones interests that you advise us of the response?

The benefit would be 2 fold. This would stop JMK being bombarded with multiple emails, whilst busy with year end and the sale of SA, with the same / similar questions. This would also clear up some of the possible misconceptions of the current status. If you have been given a response that info is in the public domain and not subject to any restrictions unless they are of a personal nature.

Surely this is a logical process to follow, particularly if you feel some are deliberately trying to instill doubt?

Alternatively, as a group, we should prepare questions for JMK and then post the response here for all to see.

One has to accept that the recent RNS has created more questions and speculation and this would go a long way to inform shareholders.

That was my response at the time as well Gotreal. I agree 100%.

I saw it as a form of dilution which has been one of the ongoing factors that has destroyed share holder value to date. At the same time it also gave an implied value to Molefe set as 23% for $ 700k.

I have to believe that Jubilee management have a bigger picture that will be revealed as some stage. Some on this platform with mining experience appear to think that this is a pretty standard arrangement. We are at risk with any failure by Galileo which would have significant impact on our projections but I assume that there are checks and balances in the agreement.

Hopefully soon all will be revealed.

Morning Frog.

I was referring to the implied value of $700k investment by Galileo for up to 23% share of Molefe. That part was clearly open to misinterpretation as we have seen, if it is taken in isolation as stated in the RNS. It's a signifucsnt statement.

I recall the RNS issued on the offer for the SA ops and that it was some time after the initial RNS, that the market was advised that the debt would also be cleared. That was a significant ommission that changed the value of the transaction.

Some members who are experienced in the mining industry might see this deal with Galileo as a great deal, but as it currently stands I think the regular investor probably doesn't. Hence the flat market response.

@Dorfan

Thanks for your input.

Agree with some of your statements but I still believe the RNS could have been structured to provide more clarity on the JV arrangement. It certainly does give the impression Jubilee are giving away a significant % of a resource for $700k indirectly setting a value for the project. Although we know that could not be correct.

The way the RNS are structured they are certainly not generating excitement.

Management might be familiar with all the aspects the arrangement and recognize the value, but anyone reading just RNS would be hard pressed to see that or extrapolate the full benefit of the arrangement.

Under what entity were the shares held in Merafe, as there doesn't appear to be a significant Bafokeng share holding in Jubilee?

Btw, Merafe are under duress at the moment and are retrenching thousands.

Agreed BB. For lth frustration is the norm.

We all know the potential, but Jubilee continues to stumble from one weak RNS to the next. We live in hope of at least one significant announcement, that would boost sentiment and restore confidence.

Fortunately copper is flying at the moment, but Jubilee will need to produce significant quantities to lift the share price. A prelim report on Molefe showing a significant Cu reserve would certainly help.

Let's hope for a positive response to the release of the financials which are due in the next few days. The timing of the AGM which I believe is planned for second half Dec, is not great and hopefully not done for obvious reasons. Surely if they plan to hold it in the next weeks they could have announced the date by now?

The LWP is also key for market sentiment as this project has taken far too long now. Let's hope we get a great RNS on this. This alone has the potential to provide a significant boost.

We live in hope that the potential of Jubilee will shortly be realised.

Whoever writes these RNS gives the impression that they are not particularly interested in a positive market response.

Surely they could have thrown in a sweetener wrt prelim findings of the drilling programs / resource definition at M?

As a result of the omission one can only assume that there IS currently nothing worth mentioning.

Jubilee management are currently stuck between a rock and a hard place. We are a long way out for meaningful copper production AND we've killed the goose.

The current ytd financials will probably reflect that 80% of our revenue is coming from SA. I was really hoping that the early assessment/ indications were that we had a super pit or at least a significant finding to validate the transition.

I hope that the delay in the last FY results aren't just another bad omen.

The RNS as issued today by Galileo is quite informative.

"Galileo's board includes Colin Bird, Jubilee's former chair, and Christopher Molefe, a current non-executive director of Jubilee. Christopher Molefe recused himself from both the Galileo and Jubilee boards consideration of this agreement"

Join the dots.

At the time I noticed that there was also a connection to the buyout of the SA operations to the chairman of Jubilee.

Lots of fuzzy gray areas.

As always the shareholders are left to shuffle around in the dark groping for clues. I don't think that anyone loves this deal.

Galileos RNS is quite informative.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/GLR/collaboration-agreement-over-molefe-project-ap9b27dpqvkh7vq.html

Let's hope todays RNS is overshadowed by the financials which are well over due, and would most likely be released next week.

Hopefully they will bring some Xmas cheer but the delay is a concern.

Have we been played again?

After the long delay of "finding" a suitable mining partner, Leon's old mate arrives in the scene 😂.

"Up to" $700k to be spent to secure 23.75% stake in Molefe.

"Up to", "targeting", "units" etc etc.

Leon's speak.

I think it was Kalan that mentioned that they have a market cap of $10m. Why not structure a buy out instead of indirect dilution. Bring their skills in house and look at future projects as well? We are cash flush aren't we?

We could pay them out over 3 years comfortably.

Should be soon HD.

As per the RNS last month:

☆☆

The Company expects to deliver its audited results for the financial year ending 30 June 2025 during the second half of November 2025.