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

"We expect some positive news I would think in the short to medium term, i.e. CERTAINLY sewn up by Christmas one or two strategic investors to help us really lift the value of this portfolio to levels which we have not seen for many years." RE's video interview, 21 September 2023 (forward wind to 8:00) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2KU3IsJ99s

​When Sarah Lowther asked the question: "Are you having any partnership conversations with peers?", RE's reply was: "Yes, we are, we are, that is my job No.1, to deliver that". " Video interview, 23 November 2023 (forward wind to 13:15) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

So, Rob regards his job's No.1 priority ​is to deliver the strategic investor(s) before the end of 2023. So, I hope/expect Rob will come out of the bunker announcing triumphantly ​that he has secured the deal(s). If that happens that would be wonderful news, we can ​all rejoice and breathe a sigh of relief of the survivability of JAY. If he doesn't, ​what then? Would his position become untenable​? That would depend on how major shareholders react. Look what Rod McIllree has to face tomorrow, 1 December 2023:

Requisitioned General Meeting (see item 3) - https://tinyurl.com/jztdv5ed

Update regarding Requisitioned General Meeting - https://tinyurl.com/y939c8ye

Https://tinyurl.com/59yw74zs

I have used the RNS announcements on 24.03.22 and 31.07.23 to come up with the shareholdings for the following individuals:

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Robert Edwards (Chairman): 285,714

Bo Møller Stensgaard (CEO): 206,428

Michael Hutchinson: 1,285,714

Peter Waugh: 497,366

SENIOR MANAGEMENT

Hans Jensen: 571,428

Thomas Levin: 446,428

Kevin Sheil: 2,112,857

INDIVIDUAL SUBSTANTIAL SHAREHOLDER

Roderick McIllree: 75,820,635 (former Chairman and CEO)

​RNS - 24.03.22 - https://tinyurl.com/mvabn29r

RNS - 31.07.23 - https://tinyurl.com/m8bajmk9

My comments:

1. The current ​shareholdings of Rob Edwards and Mo Stensgaard are ​pitifully low. I would like to see them have more skin in the game by increasing their holdings substantially after the announcement of strategic investor(s).

2. Good to see Rod McIllree as a steadfast shareholder. ​I know for a fact that on 25 April 2023, Rod purchased additional shares in the millions but they are not reflected in his holding of 75,820,635. The reason for this was he did not buy enough shares to go into the next threshold for regulatory reporting purposes - https://tinyurl.com/bd43ayat

EnuffRMbs - You ask: "What are restrictions if any on us selling their shares?"

See para 17 (page 45) - "Lock-in and Orderly Market Arrangements and Relationship Agreement"

https://tinyurl.com/2xzzpjze

Https://tinyurl.com/5n99nrxz

NB:

1. JAY owns 29.98% of Metals One (62,500,000 shares).

2. The announcement that Metals One would next week commence a diamond drilling program highlights the fact that ​JAY's projects in Finland will also have a longer season for mining activities than its projects in Greenland.

BurtonD - Thank you gratefully for alerting us in advance of the interview by starting this thread. I liked the way Sarah Lowther opened the interview with the important question: "What prospects do shareholders have of actually getting their money back?"

With the restricted time that was available for the interview, Sarah did her best by covering many issues but I wish she had probed Rob Edwards a little deeper on a couple of specifics. In my opinion, the two burning issues for shareholders are:

1. Survivability of Bluejay by bringing in strategic investors pretty urgently.

2. Make progress with the stalled flagship Disko project, in particular by starting a drilling campaign in 2024.

As for (1), I would have raised this:

In August 2023, Bluejay said it was in advanced discussions with a few strategic investors and that the company was hopeful of concluding the discussions in the second half of this year. In September 2023, RE said the company was expecting to have the deals with one, or preferably two, strategic investors sewn up by Christmas 2023. I wish Sarah had probed RE with the question of how confident he was in delivering the company’s expectations in this regard before the end of 2023. When RE said, “Everyone would like a definitive date - well, we are pushing as fast as we can” - that’s when Sarah could have probed him with the specific information I have given above.

As for (2), I would have raised this:

In his strategic review in February 2023, RE informed shareholders that both Bluejay and KoBold were committed to developing the best and most effective program possible for 2023 and beyond. Sadly, there was no field program in 2023. In September 2023, RE said both Bluejay and KoBold were committed to instituting a program for Disko for 2024. I wish Sarah had probed RE about how confident he was in delivering on his expectations of a drilling field program for Disko in 2024, and also when shareholders can expect an announcement. When RE said, "That (Disko) needs to be drilled. Our task No.1 is getting that drilled" - that’s when Sarah could have probed him with the specific information I have given above. 

I have a LARGE six-figure holding in Bluejay (more than some of the Board members of the company!) and therefore have a heavily vested interest in the success of the company. Additionally, I have invested time and effort in researching the company (inside out). Maybe the next time you alert us about an impending interview, I would be happy to contact you with some suggested questions. In the meantime, I hope RE will delight us all with some cheerful news before Christmas and his next interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

Uggy100 - You say: "I agree Ashton, RE seems to be full of smoke & mirrors which is not acceptable, slipping timeliness yet again it seems which is unacceptable."

I am not sure about "smoke & mirrors". I thought Rob Edwards was brutally honest when he said: "Bluejay hasn't really delivered in the past few years." I also thought RE covered a lot of relevant issues in answering Sarah Lowther's questions. That said, I thought Sarah missed out on probing him a little deeper on a couple of important questions. I may post a note on this later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

In the note I posted on 21 November at 9:33, I said: "I refer you to the note I posted on 4 November 2023 at 11:32. The Disko Mineral Exploration Licence Application M-MLSA-337 for an area of 116.63 km2 has now reappeared as pending on the Government of Greenland website but with the acreage revised to 115.57 km2. I don't know what to make of the fine-tuning of the acreage by the Mineral Licence and Safety Authority (MLSA). Hope we will have confirmation of the actual licence, along with the Disko update soon."

I can now report that M-MLSA-337 - having reappeared as a "pending application" - has disappeared (for the second time) from the "pending applications" list. Come on MLSA, make up your mind! I am getting tired of all this cloak-and-dagger stuff. I hope we will soon have confirmation of the actual licence, along with the Disko update. Please note that the application date for M-MLSA-3337 was 5 September 2022, so more than a year has passed since then.

The application was referred to in the RNS on 21 September 2023 (see item 6 under bullet point 4) - https://tinyurl.com/yhf5afz3

Sarah Lowther: "What should we be expecting in terms of near-term newsflow?

Rob Edwards: "We are in the bunker so to speak with a couple of strategics to get those across the line. That's a long-size survivability, that's my key aim. Yes, we aim to deliver that in the not-too-distant future, So, what does that mean? Everyone would like a definitive date - well, we are pushing as fast as we can, so we hope to have news on that front and I think that would be hugely reassuring to people (a) it would be an external validation of what other people think of us not what the market thinks on a daily basis, it’s not sentiment driven. It's real dollars going into assets. Yes, so that's really really what we're focused on."

My comment: RE aims to deliver on the strategic investor(s) in the not-too-distant future but regretfully he does not make any reference to the deal(s) being sewn up by Christmas 2023 this time, which was what he said previously. In my opinion, if RE failed to deliver before the end of 2023, his credibility could suffer a huge knock. I sincerely hope it will not come to that for his sake and us.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

HereforHemo - You ask whether Rob Edwards's comments on additional listings related to:

1. Difficulties in raising capital on AIM.

2. Negotiations with the prospective strategic partners.

I would say "Yes" to (1). As for (2), he referred only to the strategic partner the company was talking to in North America. He did not, however, make a similar reference to the Finnish strategic partner but did say "Greenland resonates with Scandinavia". No reference to Finland in this regard though - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

I have already said before that I am keeping an open mind on this matter as it would very much depend on how important this issue is for the strategic partners with whom JAY is negotiating.

EnuffRMbs - You ask: "Ashton, do you think they might be considering hiving off one of the chunks (like the Finish assets on Scandi listing)? To what end?"

If you refer to my post on 0/11/23 at 8:50, this is what I said:

~~~

[My speculation that the strategic deal for Finland that we are waiting to hear is likely to cover JAY's full portfolio of assets (Enonkoski, Hammaslahti and Outokumpu) was not entirely speculation.

In his video interview on 21/09/23 (forward wind to 7:00 mins ), Rob Edwards commented: "We essentially have more than one company in one corporate structure. You can easily have a junior company with Disko; You can easily have a junior company with Kangerluarsuk: You can EASILY HAVE A JUNIOR COMPANY WITH FINNISH ASSETS." - https://tinyurl.com/ytrmbk37

RE repeated the same message in his interview on 28/09/23 (forward wind to 17:30 mins): "We would aim to replace, AND PERHAPS ENLARGE Rio's prior commitment in Finland. When we present ourselves to strategics we fall naturally into two silos. ONE'S FINLAND, ONE'S GREENLAND." - https://tinyurl.com/muscrs3s ]

~~

I made the above comments before RE's interview yesterday. I am not sure what to make of Rob Edwards' latest comment " "We are CERTAINLY exploring other listings. I think there is certainly an audience in Canada and I think there is CERTAINLY an audience in Scandinavia (Denmark, Norway and Sweden are Scandinavian countries) as well" - 16:30 into the interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

Back to your question about a Scandinavian listing. All that I would say is I am keeping an open mind as this would very much depend on the views of the strategic partners who are negotiating with JAY in the "bunker"! We have already been told that one of the strategic investors for the Finnish assets is a mining company from a Nordic country (Denmark, Norway and Sweden are Nordic countries).

The most important near-term issue for me is RE delivers at least one, preferably two, strategic investors before the end of 2023. After all, RE has repeatedly and confidently raised expectations on this vitally crucial issue.

LWHL - I have noted your comments with interest.

Not sure why Rob Edwards decided to do this interview at this juncture as there was nothing substantially new in what was said except that the company was exploring additional listings. Also, why did he not repeat his previously stated timetable for delivering one, preferably two strategic investors by Christmas 2023? Should he fail to deliver without a valid reason, his position could become untenable because major shareholders may decide to show their displeasure. Let's hope it won't come to that and we have a string of good news before too long.

"We are CERTAINLY exploring other listings. I think there is certainly an audience in Canada and I think there is certainly an audience in Scandinavia (Denmark, Norway and Sweden) " - 16:30 into the interview - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oczIJp5OBbI

This is entirely new news to me. What exactly is JAY up to?

HereforHemo - You ask: "Is it not possible that KoBold could just opt to spend more on Phase 2 as they did on Phase 1, without changing the JV agreement? After all the $11.6m is just a minimum spend requirement for them to get to 51%."

Under Stage I of the JV agreement, KoBold had a commitment to sole-fund a minimum of US$3.4 million in 2022 but they opted to spend more in order to collect significantly more geophysical and geochemical data than was originally planned. Your question is will KoBold overspend on the drilling campaign under Stage II as well?

I see two options here: Option1 - Restrict the spending to the contracted amount of $11.6m on the drilling campaign resulting in less than adequate results or, Option 2 - Spend an amount over and above $11.6m so that the maximum number of the promising targets are drilled during SAME seasonal window (summer 2024) and achieve optimal results. Please note, in addition to the known targets, KoBold has identified a further 9 strong targets for drilling. Also note, by drilling the maximum number of target holes during the SAME seasonal window one would gain from economies of scale.

As I see it, there is no guarantee that KoBold would be minded to repeat its generous overspending on the SAME project twice, especially when a dilution route is there (in theory) to mitigate the overspend. So, I would be surprised if KoBold were to decide to overspend without getting something back in return. Much as I would like to see KoBold sole-fund the overspend, I am trying to be objective and honest with my opinion here. Be that as it may, I could be quite wrong in my view of the need to overspend in order to achieve optimal results from the drilling campaign, in which case all my talk on this subject would be redundant!

KoBold entered into a A$7 million, five-year, JV Agreement with londrive Ltd to advance the company's lithium projects in South Korea. The Australian Security Exchange-listed company made the announcement yesterday, 22 November 2023. Here is the RNS (ASX release):

https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/ION/02743205.pdf

https://iondrive.com.au/

My comment: This announcement puts to bed any notion of the claim that KoBold is focused on its Zambian project and expansion into the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) at the expense of other projects. Not so, as this agreement demonstrates. KoBold will go where the money takes. If KoBold thinks there is money to be made from Disko, they will pursue it in some shape or form.

What has prompted me to post this note is what HereforHemo had said: ".....it wouldn't surprise me if KoBold spend far more than the $12m that was originally allocated." - (posted on 21 November 2023 at 23:20).

The KoBold JV agreement announced on 9 August 2021 stated: "Stage II: Sole funding of either US$11.6 million in drilling expenditure or 15 pre-agreed drill holes within the Disko licence area by 31 December 2024."

The expenditure of $11.6 m was set more than two years ago. Can a meaningful drilling campaign be carried out with a budget of $11.6 million when mining costs have escalated by over 30% since the JV was announced (click on the link below)? I doubt very much. If so, what can be done? Both KoBold and JAY could mutually agree to adjust the terms of the JV agreement to increase the drilling expenditure for Stage II above the original $11.6m level to an amount that would achieve a meaningful drilling campaign. This would mean (a) JAY making a financial contribution towards the agreed increase in the amount of money - over and above the $11.6m - and on the basis of the 51%: 49% ownership ratio or (b) Instead of JAY making any cash contribution whatsoever, agree to a proportionate dilution of the company's ownership of Nikkeli Greenland A/S. Is it just possible that ONE of the reasons for the delay in announcing the 2024 drilling campaign could be this factor? Just a thought and I would welcome comments.

https://tinyurl.com/463btfxs

PS: There is precedent to tweaking a previously agreed deal in light of changing circumstances, as long as both parties agree to it. A recent example is that the terms of the agreement between JAY and Metals1 announced on 29 July 2021 for partial divestment of Finnish Black Shale Assets for £4m were subsequently adjusted.

Further to the note I posted on 20 October 2023, I can now add this additional information. At Europe's leading international mining investment event to be held in London on 28-30 November 2023, Kurt House (CEO of KoBold Metals) will be covering these two questions in his presentation on 29 November 2023 at 11.00 am:

1. How can the industry shorten the gap from exploration to production?

2. Why does the Lassonde Curve take 16 years?

https://minesandmoney.com/london/speaker/kurt-house

In this video interview, Mark Jarvis (CEO and Chairman of Giga Metals from British Columbia, Canada) talks about the Lassonde Curve. A fascinating interview and in some ways Giga Metals' journey sounded quite interesting when thinking about JAY's current situation where shareholders are waiting to hear about Disko drilling and strategic investors.

The value of a mining stock roughly follows the market value of its reserves with a premium paid when those reserves are successfully brought to market. Positive outcomes from drilling and assay results can give a significant boost to the stock as Mark Davis explains in the video. I found the whole video well worth a watch. Also, please see my next post.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHrlr_xf-ng

I refer you to the note I posted on 4 November 2023 at 11:32. The Disko Mineral Exploration Licence ​Application M-MLSA-337 for an area of 116.63 km2 has now reappeared as pending ​on the Government of Greenland website but ​with the acreage revised to 115.57 km2. I don't know what to make of the fine-tuning of the acreage by the Mineral Licence and Safety Authority (MSLA). Hope we will have confirmation of the actual licence​,​ along with the Disko update soon.

The application was referred to in the RNS on 21 September 2023 (see item 6 under bullet point 4) - https://tinyurl.com/yhf5afz3

EnuffRMbs - You say: "Then we (JAY) want to bring in a new partner to drill because Kobold are not interested. But new partner wants a share .. in stages. But even giving them 10% means we are no longer in control."

Since your comments are in the realm of a hypothetical situation, I would join in by suggesting that if KoBold are not interested they would sell up their interest in Disko lock, stock, and barrel to a mining giant (BHP, Anglo America, etc) and move on.

I honestly think it might be more productive for us to wait for the next Disko update from JAY and then pick up this conversation thereafter.