Member Info for A-s-h-t-o-n

That said, a 2-week delay is neither here nor there.

Forcemode - The short answer to your question is I don't know why the delay but did you take a look at the note I posted on 19 July 2024 at 08:58 under the thread "Name Change and Announcements of Deals/Agreements"? - https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/a-s-h-t-o-n/?page=3

That said, 2-week delay neither here nor there.

Bigboyblue - You are right about Kangerluarsuk. Some years ago (and well before the recent Dundas MRE fiasco), RM did say if JAY were to start all over again the company would start with Kangerluarsuk and not Dundas. Kangerluarsuk has a few great things going for it: (a) Adjacent to the former high-grade Black Angel Zn-Pb-Ag mine which produced 11.2 MT @ 12.6% Zn, 4.1% Pb and 29 g/t Ag (b) District scale (c) Zinc has been deemed as a critical mineral by several countries including the USA in February 2022 - https://tinyurl.com/9n2ramx5

However, you would have concluded from the video interview with RM I shared, JAY's priority projects are Disko, Hammaslahti, Thule and Jameson land. Of these, the primary focus is Disko. After all, Disko is the most prized possession, the “hidden crown jewel” in JAY's portfolio, according to RM. He has disappointed us big time with the failure to take Dundas to production but he is a highly experienced geologist in his own right. Because of his long history and experience in Greenland with over 20 years working on the island, JAY was able to exploit the first mover advantage and pick up some of the most significant licences in Greenland. As for Disko, and according to RM, and I quote him: "All the geological information gathered since its first discovery over 140 years ago, (Disko) indicates that this could be the second largest occurrence of nickel in the world, If that thesis is proven, and it’s only going to take one drill hole, then the opportunity for manifold returns on investment is there."

Even when Dundas was going swimming well, I was promoting ​on Michael Walters' chat board ​that Disko ​​was the most significant prospect among JAY's portfolio of assets​. I am in JAY primarily because of Disko. ​I​t needs drilling and RM is energetically determined to achieve this outcome.​

I said RM is energetically determined to come up with a plan for Disko. In his video interview on 20 June 2024, he said JAY ​was very optimistic about everything there and the company was working on the timeline for next year (2025). What did RM mean by "Very optimistic about EVERYTHING"? Let's see what the next update on Disko says.

Forward wind the video to 15:30 min - https://youtu.be/PidhWEVzGP0?t=2

Bigboyblue - Thank you for your comments. It was useful to have your comments on Anglo American as an ex-Arc shareholder.

You say: "I can't help thinking that Jay are not operating from a position of great strength and AAL may prefer to try and let things run their natural course before snapping up the licences for next to nothing to add to their already impressive acreage in the region."

I agree JAY are not operating from a position of strength and I suspect JAY must be mindful of the possibility of Anglo American thinking along the lines you have suggested. A significant factor here - which must not be overlooked - is that Disko has progressed to the point where it has now been identified with seven high-priority targets with potential deposits on a large scale, thanks to the work of KoBold. Disko licences will therefore be of some value to any major miner at the right terms, especially given the fact that we are talking of nickel and copper prospects. So, one of the options for JAY - should it ever come to that - would be to put the Disko licences out for sale among major miners rather than let it fall by the wayside. That said, I know RM is energetically determined to progress Disko and he may well have a plan to do that and I am therefore keenly waiting for the next update on Disko.

Jeez - I prefer Merlots.

I said: " RM did NOT infer he can successfully negotiate a 51% ownership interest for JAY with AA but that any such negotiations - if concluded - would mean JAY having to forego majority ownership interest of Disko.'"

Please read what I said carefully. I purposely included the qualification "IF CONCLUDED". This qualification meant that the deal does not necessarily have to be concluded if AA were to insist on a majority interest and JAY could choose to walk away.

To save time from prolonging this discussion further, let me repeat this: "At the AGM on 26 June 2024, when I asked Rod McIllree whether a three-way Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) on Disko between Anglo American (AA), JAY and KoBold Metals was possible, he replied that this would mean JAY not be able to exercise majority ownership of Disko (51%). "

Rach - You are confusing me.

You say: "...you (Ashton) stated that the only acceptable deal for RM would be if Jay retained 51% - which of course is cuckoo land."

You then go on and say: "....Now that we've established that RM will accept less than 51%..."

At the AGM on 26 June 2024, when I asked Rod McIllree whether a three-way Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) on Disko between Anglo American (AA), JAY and KoBold Metals was possible, he replied that this would mean JAY not be able to exercise majority ownership of Disko (51%). When I previously shared this information some posters may have misunderstood what I was trying to say. RM did NOT infer he can successfully negotiate a 51% ownership interest for JAY with AA but that any such negotiations - if concluded - would mean JAY having to forego majority ownership interest of Disko. Hope that clears up any misunderstanding. That said, RM will know what terms are generally acceptable to AA because the two companies were unsuccessful in reaching an agreement on a deal on Disko previously because the deal was done with KoBold. JAY will therefore be aware that AA tends to go for much more than 51% in ownership interest. This takes me nicely to a deal AA signed recently with a junior miner which highlights the main purpose of this note.

Arc Minerals (AIM: ARCM) is a junior miner working on copper projects in Zambia and Botswana. Arc Minerals ​has a JVA with AA​. Readers may be interested to learn from this particular JVA what terms are generally acceptable to AA. The JVA was initially announced on 12 May 2022 ( https://tinyurl.com/4hwch663 ) and the unconditional final completion of it was confirmed on 10 November 2023 ( https://tinyurl.com/2p9z58tz ). The JVA has three phases as follows:

Phase I - 3 years - 51% ownership - US$38m expenditure

Phase II - 2 years - 60% ownership - US$20m expenditure (Total US$58m)

Phase III - 2 years - 70% ownership - US$30m expenditure (Total US$88m)

Leaving aside the expenditure figures (as this would depend on many factors), the striking features of this particular JVA are that it runs for 7 years and the final ownership interest of AA is 70%. The respective figures for JAY’s JVA with KoBold are 3 years and 51%.

Luminex Resources is another example of AA's ear-in agreement ​on a project called Pegasus. The agreement provides ​AA with a 70% ownership interest (with a "Development Decision Option"): ​The Original agreement ​was in 2018 ​​and was revised in 2023 - https://tinyurl.com/38mtaspj

​To sum up, it is unlikely AA would agree to less than majority ownership of Disko (51%), should a deal be done with JAY/KoBold - the view RM expressed at the AGM. We will know of the future direction for Disko when the next update comes out, hopefully soon.

NB: In January 2024, Luminex Resources was taken over by Adventus Mining Corporation (TSXV: ADZN) (OTCQX: ADVZF) including the Pegasus project with Anglo American - https://tinyurl.com/2zsw65ed

I agree with you Bezinio. I posted a video to show how well a junior miner has managed its progress from exploration to imminent production but see where it has ended. We can either be constructive or disruptive.

Oh dear! I must have touched a raw nerve.

EnuffRMbs - Good luck with your trading but please don’t bore me to death with the same old story about RM unless you’re able to bring some new stuff to the party (as you put it).

You must be convinced by now that JAY is not a stock worth wasting your time on unless you have so much spare time on your hands that you don't know what to do with it.

EnuffRMbs - You say: "Please bring something new to the party .."

It is new to the party in the sense no one has posted that video here before. What about you? You keep relentlessly repeating the same kind of message about Rod McIllree. Is that bringing something new to the party? I suppose you are trying to live up to your nickname here!

EnuffRMbs - First, you ask what the date of the video was when that information was already there for all to see. Now you ask "Your point is?". The title of this thread is "An interesting interview". There are some good lessons of "interest" in the video on how to successfully manage a junior miner from exploration to production. Amaroq Minerals is expected to go into gold production later this year which was the title of the video.

The date is there, 2024. Wake up!

Https://youtu.be/9aMlG7SyyKM?t=3

Rach - Under the terms of the current JV Agreement, KoBold must spend US$11.6 million in drilling-related expenditure or 15 pre-agreed drill holes by the end of 2024. Legally speaking, KoBold will remain the majority owner of Nikkeli Greenland A/S (holder of Disko licences) until the end of 2024, unless the terms of the JV are revised before then. See bullet point 3 under "The Agreement" - https://tinyurl.com/y9tyeh55

ChirpyCheep - Thank you for that clarification - apologise for misunderstanding what you meant.

You were there with me at the AGM and I asked this question of RM: “Is it possible that a future partnering arrangement for Disko might include Anglo American (AA) whereby the partnership becomes a three-way arrangement?” RM responded to my question by saying under any such arrangement it would mean JAY losing majority control and was unwilling to elaborate further. I could NOT draw any firm inferences from RM’s reply except that JAY would like to exercise majority control (51%) whilst progressing the project. Does this mean a three-way partnership would be acceptable to JAY provided the company exercises majority control (51%)? The only way this can happen is if AA joins as a partner along with JAY and KoBold and the ownership of Disko (strictly speaking Nikkeli Greenland A/S) is reconfigured in such a way that KoBold gives up 2% of Nikkeli to JAY and a proportion of the remaining 49% to AA. This would mean JAY becoming the majority owner (51%) with KoBold and AA as minority partners. I am keeping an open mind on what might be the future arrangement. This may or may not include a major miner at this stage. All that I can say is JAY will need to find sizeable new money to progress the project as a majority owner. Is this possible?

I don't think JAY and KoBold are capable of building a mine and taking the project through to production at Disko. Do you? That's why I think a major miner will be needed at some stage.

ChirpyCheep - You ask: "Why would AA want to get involved with JAY, haven't they got enough of the Disko pie?"

I can think of a few reasons:

1. In 2021, despite having its own Disko licences, AA was interested in expanding its presence in Greenland by striking a deal with JAY. However, JAY settled for the JV deal with KoBold Metals instead. If AA was interested in JAY’s Disko licences then, why not now?

2. As an earlier mover than AA, JAY was able to pick the most prospective areas of Disko for its licences. So if AA thought it would be lucrative to join forces with JAY/KoBold in exploiting the most prospective areas in Disko, why not?

3. I don’t think JAY and KoBold are capable of building a mine at Disko on their own and taking the project to production without partnering with a major miner. If so, AA would be one of the obvious choices.

4. KoBold has already refined and ranked 7 priority targets at Disko for future field and drilling programmes. So, assuming JAY/KoBold are more advanced than AA, it would be an opportune time for the latter to get involved with JAY/KoBold when much of the early exploration leg work has already been done by KoBold having spent considerably more than the US$3.4 million commitment under Stage I of the current JV.

In any case, I was surprised that you raised the question “ Why would AA want to get involved with JAY?”, when you had in the note you posted to my attention on 18 Jul 2024 at 07:36 asked me: "Wouldn't a merger of JAY's Disko and AA's Disko make sense?"

You say: "I don't think either RM or ES fancy a three-way split..." May I ask what is the basis for you expressing such an opinion? Neither Rod McIllree nor Eric Sondergaard has expressed such an opinion in public or to me. I have therefore decided to keep an open mind on the subject.

PS: It would be helpful if you could reply under this thread so that I can easily track our conversation on Disko.

In the note I posted on 4 Jul 2024 at 16:01, I said I was closely watching the major miner Anglo American's progress with its Disko licences. I can report that AA has now been granted a third field activity licence by the Government of Greenland for field activity in 2024. This particular licence is from 1 August 2024. With this latest addition, AA has been granted three field activity licences for this summer. Here are the details of the licences including the start and finish dates and the acreages:

MEL 2019-79: 2,434km² - 1 July 2024 to 15 September 2024

MEL 2019-59: 827km² - 1 July 2024 to 15 September 2024

MEL 2019-115: 1,671km² - 1 August 2024 to 15 September 2024

The total field activity licence area is 4,932km². This is 67% of AA's total Disko licence area of 7,379km². KoBold/JAY's total Disko licence area is 3,015km². This means AA's field activity licence area of 4,932km² for this summer is even larger than KoBold/JAY's total licence area of 3,015km².

At the AGM on 26 June 2024, I asked Rod McIllree this question: "Is it possible that a future partnering arrangement for Disko might include Anglo American (AA) whereby the partnership becomes a three-way arrangement?” Surprisingly RM responded to my question by saying under any such arrangement it would mean JAY losing majority control and was unwilling to elaborate further. I could NOT draw any firm inferences from RM’s reply except so far as to say JAY would ideally like to have majority control (>50%) in progressing the project. I wonder what the likelihood of a three-way partnership is: JAY, KoBold and AA. As for the ownership of Disko (strictly speaking Nikkeli Greenland A/S), there could be one of two possible outcomes:

1. KoBold gives up 2% of Nikkeli to JAY and a proportion of the remaining 49% to AA. This would mean JAY becoming the majority owner (51%) with KoBold and AA as minority partners

or

2. The Nikkeli ownership is reconfigured in such a way that AA assumes 51% (majority control) with the remaining 49% distributed between JAY and KoBold as minority partners.

All this is pure conjecture but you can never tell.

Back to AA, when will the company undertake drilling at Disko? That's what I am trying to find out. I am an AA shareholder.