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

KoBold's 2022 ACTUAL exploration expenditure was substantially more than what was required under the terms of the JV agreement. Here is the confirmation as reported to the market.

"Under Stage I of the JV agreement, KoBold had a commitment to sole-fund a minimum of US$3.4 million in exploration expenditure during 2022. KoBold opted to increase their 2022 expenditure substantially beyond their earn-in commitments. The additional expenditure by KoBold allowed the JV to collect significantly more geophysical and geochemical data than was originally planned."

"Total exploration expenditures for Nikkeli's Disko-Nuussuaq licences during 2022 have been approved by the Mineral Licencing and Safety Authority ('MLSA'), Government of Greenland. The approved expenditures cover both the 2022 and 2023 licence commitments."

Please see 1st and 2nd items under bullet point 3 - https://tinyurl.com/yhf5afz3

EnuffRMbs - You present an interesting analysis. You seem to suggest whether KoBold might play dirty because you say: "Or we go bust and K then probably get the lot and do a deal with a major anyway for £0. They are on a winner having spent FA."

If JAY went bust, KoBold would NOT get the whole of Nikkeli Greenland A/S (holder of Disko licences) automatically. If JAY went to the wall, all of the company's assets, including 49% of Nikkeli Greenland, would go into administration and it is for the administrator to decide how best to dispose of JAY's assets in order to achieve maximum value from them. In theory, a major miner (e.g. Anglo American) could bid for 49% of Disko. What I am trying to say here is that things won't be as straightforward as you seem to suggest.

You ask me: "Have you seen this weeks news regarding their plans, and failed bids in DRC?"

Yes, I am aware of KoBold's intention to move into the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). In fact, I posted a note on 15 Nov 2023 at 20:38 in which I referred to KoBold's JV flagship Mingomba Cu project in Zambia, the 100% owned Raglan District Ni-Cu-Co-PGE Cape Smith Belt project in subarctic Quebec plus its intention to expand its footprint into DRC.

"For new nickel projects, strategic investors are very focused on jurisdictional safety and large, long-life mines when making investment decisions. Mining giants like BHP and Vale have been uncharacteristically aggressive, acquiring most major nickel sulfide deposits worldwide over the last 3 years." - https://tinyurl.com/2s458bm4

JAY has two district-scale assets Disko and Kangerluarsuk in a safe jurisdiction, namely Greenland. Dr. Peter Lightfoot, currently Technical Lead of Magmatic Systems at KoBold worked as Chief Geologist for Vale from 1996-2016 (20 years). He is regarded as one of the world's foremost experts in Nickel Sulphide ore bodies and this is what he said in the RNS on 9 August 2021: " "The Disko-Nuussuaq Property is centred in a region of extensive contaminated and metal-depleted volcanic centres where there is clear evidence for the equilibration of flood basalt magma with crustal sulfur with potential for the concentration of magmatic sulphides in shallow sub-volcanic intrusions. The rich inventory of government and exploration data provides an excellent starting point for KoBold to utilize proprietary technology to support exploration."

"There's no reason that those (Disko) targets wouldn't be drilled, and they should be drilled." - Rob Edwards (28 September 2023). All that is needed now is an RNS confirmation​ of drilling in 2024.

IvRoche - You say: "Note: If it did happen I think Anglo American would buy before BHP and consolidate the entirety of Disko island under them."

Rob Edwards made these statements in his 28 September 2023 video interview:

"Bluejay had looked at another deal (for Disko) from a big mining company" (9:30 mins into the video) - I suspect he was referring to Anglo American here.

"There are other big interests in the area (Disko), namely Anglo American who has staked ground around us" (11:00 mins into the video)

So, I too would rate AA as another potential candidate to replace KoBold if/when it decides to sell its 51% stake in Disko. That said, my top pick is BHP because of KoBold's already established close relationship with the major miner, including the fact that BHP is a KoBold shareholder. Here is an interesting observation. As a shareholder of KoBold, BHP already has indirect part ownership of Nikkeli Greenland A/S. As a majority owner of Nikkeli Greenland, it would be down to KoBold to decide to whom it decides to sell its 51% stake in Disko (should it happen), even if AA shows an interest in the asset. But what if AA were to outbid BHP with a better price for the 51% stake? Dream on!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgIt_T6SJ08

Here is a hypothetical question: What might be the share price reaction if BHP replaces KoBold - becomes the new JV partner - and carries out the Disko drilling campaign in 2024 - with JAY still holding 49% of the asset? After all, BHP has the necessary financial muscle to buy off KoBold’s 51% stake in Disko - possesses the required drilling know-how and all the necessary equipment and manpower to carry out the drilling task without the need for tendering for outside contractors. What's more, it would free up KoBold so that the company can focus more on its other projects (e.g. the JV flagship Mingomba Cu project in Zambia, the 100% owned Raglan District Ni-Cu-Co-PGE Cape Smith Belt project in subarctic Quebec, etc) plus expand its footprint into the Democratic Republic of Congo. If you think I am talking a lot of tosh, I won't be offended.

HereforHemo - You say: "I expect a Tier 1 partner for all of the Finnish assets with a cash injection to Bluejay."

I agree 100%. "We would aim to replace and perhaps enlarge Rio's prior commitment (Enonkoski) in Finland" - Robert Edwards (Video interview 28 September 2023 - 18:00 mins into the video - https://tinyurl.com/yc6ah647 ).

Joshua Hughes, VP of Exploration, Bluejay Mining is organising the pre-conference workshop on Magmatic Ni- Cu-Co-PGE Sulphide Mineral Systems in Europe at the Mineral Deposits Studies Group conference from 3-5 January 2024.

https://ow.ly/Bn1X50Q6Uuo

Polkadotdoor - I have read the reports you have shared and more (see two further reports worth reading, if you haven't already- links below). These are my comments:

1. Nothing new in what you have highlighted because historical drilling issues at Disko are well known and why they happened.

2. KoBold undertook extensive due diligence prior to signing up for the JV. Dr. Peter Lightfoot, Technical Lead of Magmatic Systems at KoBold, assisted with the due diligence. He was involved in the Falconbridge exploration and drilling at Disko (1991-1996). He would have known of the drilling risks and advised KoBold accordingly but the JV still went ahead.

3. Past drilling at Disko was carried out in the early 1990s and before. I suspect drilling methods and equipment have advanced in the last 30 years.

4. KoBold's AI technology was not available then. I suspect KoBold can prioritise safer drilling targets. In any case, KoBold's 2022 fieldwork results have NOT highlighted any drilling risks.

5. Major miner Anglo American has obtained exploration licences covering an extensive area around Disko. AA's licence area amounts to a total of 8,897km² in comparison to Nikkeli's 3,019 km² (including the 116 km² mentioned in the recent RNS). Common sense tells me AA would NOT have taken up such a huge area for exploration at Disko without weighing up the risks.

I think you are unduly overplaying the historical drilling risks encountered and ignoring the factors I have highlighted above. If you are convinced that the risks are too high, then perhaps JAY is not the proposition for you as an investment or potential investment. If you are not already a shareholder, maybe the best course of action for you is to wait until all drilling activities have been completed and then review the situation. That's the best advice I can give you.

https://eng.geus.dk/media/13318/go17.pdf

https://eng.geus.dk/media/13313/go24.pdf

"no deeper really than many nickel sulphide targets around the world"

Polkadotdoor - It is disappointing that you have misquoted RE as having used the words Disko drilling was: ["easy/simple/not very deep"] when he had not used the words ["easy/simple"]. Now you say you were "Paraphrasing slightly". RE referred to Disko drilling targets as being, and I quote: ["no deeper than nickel sulphide targets around the world"], and nothing about it being "easy" or "simple" - (forward wind the video to 10:00 mins) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgIt_T6SJ08

It is important you exercise great care when quoting others because any misquoting could result in misleading.

In my view, Disko drilling will not be straightforward. For a start, it presents difficult terrain and also the presence of gas pockets. In fact, Bo Stensgaard referred to past failures in drilling at Disko in his podcast on 1 February 2022.  He said drilling techniques have improved since then and also that JAY can learn from past mistakes. Here is the link to the podcast (forward wind it to 4:00 mins) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gggOBrZQE6Q 

What I am not sure about is whether KoBold will also be able to identify safer drilling areas and factor in this information when prioritising drilling targets. We don't know.

Polkadotdoor - You have quoted RE as having said that Disko drilling was: [“easy/simple/not very deep”}. When and where did Rob Edwards use the words: ["easy/simple/not very deep"]?

On 10 August 2023, I posted a note in which I said that although the applicant's name for the Mineral Exploration Licence application M-MLSA-337 was yet to be published, I had done some digging (pardon the pun) and believed that the applicant could be Nikkeli Greenland. I also said that the application covered an area of 116.63 km2 and gave further details. Please take a look at that note.

On 21 September 2023, when JAY released the results of the Disko 2022 fieldwork RNS the company confirmed the M-MLSA-337 application and said: "An application for a new Mineral Exploration Licence ('MEL') totalling 116.6 square kilometres ('sq-km') has been submitted by Nikkeli to the MLSA, Government of Greenland. The new MEL will provide Nikkeli with a buffer around its existing licences and secures a continuous land position along the drill accessible north coast of Disko Island where the Company has several high-priority drill targets." Please see 3rd bullet point in the RNS - https://tinyurl.com/yhf5afz3

I have been closely monitoring the progress of M-MLSA-337 and can report that the application has now disappeared from the Government of Greenland web page for applications waiting to be approved. When a pending application is approved it then moves across and appears on the page for "Approved Licences". Although M-MLSA-337 has not yet appeared on the "Approved ​Licences" page, there is normally a time lag between the two events. Given this to be the case, we should hear something from JAY about the outcome of the application soon, hopefully confirming the new licence for Disko. I would be even more delighted if the "New Disko Licence" RNS is released ​along with the all-important ​confirmation and details of Disko’s 2024 field and drilling programmes. I await in anticipation.

IvRoche - Good to have your alternative view, as it helps a more balanced discussion. I fully understand when you say JAY will want to keep Hammaslahti and look to JV Outokumpu and/or Enonkoski. I too would like to see Hammaslahti remain 100% in-house because of its high grade and the mining operation would be in part open-pit, and therefore relatively low-cost (former open-pit and underground mines produced a total of 7 million tonnes of Copper, Zinc and Gold). In his strategic review (RNS 14/02/23) Rob Edwards said: "I would also add that Bluejay is clearly capable of progressing projects itself, something that I am determined the Company should pursue more confidently in the future." I bet Hammaslahti fell into RE's category of "progressing projects itself" but the key proviso in all this is subject to availability of funding. Another project that RE may well have included in his thinking is Outokumpu, but again subject to the availability of funding. There lies the problem for JAY, the company is tight on funds. So, JAY may not have much choice but to agree to include all three Finnish assets as part of the deal if the prospective strategic investor insists on this as a condition to make the deal worthwhile for them. JAY's financial situation is so dire (survivability) that in his video interview on 28/09/23 (17:00 mins into the video - link below), RE set out with clarity his two-pronged near-term objectives as:

1. Achieve survivability of JAY.

2. Deliver adequate budgets into next year (2024).

That said, HereforHemo made the point that JAY was talking to two or even three prospective partners for the Finland deal. If that is the case, it will be interesting to see what terms are finally agreed for the deal.

https://tinyurl.com/muscrs3s

In my note yesterday I said the licences relating to Enonkoski, Hammaslahti and Outokumpu are currently held by JAY's 100% owned subsidiaries FinnAust Mining Finland Oy and FinnAust Mining Northern Oy.

This is not correct. The licences relating to Enonkoski, Hammaslahti and Outokumpu are currently held by JAY's 100% owned subsidiaries FinnAust Mining Finland Oy. I should NOT have referred to FinnAust Mining Northern Oy in my comment as it is the licence holder of the Black Schist Project which is now 100% owned by Metals One. Sorry about the error.

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

Https://twitter.com/BluejayMining/status/1719651713487880377/photo/1

HereforHemo - I sincerely hope you are right about JAY not having to play such a weak hand because the company was talking to at least two or probably three prospective partners. I must say it pained me to see JAY losing majority control of Disko to KoBold (51%).

In the note I posted on 31/10/23, I said I would post something about my thinking on the nature of the potential deal between JAY and the prospective strategic investor regarding one or more of the three Finnish assets Enonkoski, Hammaslahti and Outokumpu.

As the saying goes " There's more than one way to skin a cat". So what could be the nature of the deal?​ I will start with the factual factor. We have two parties, namely the strategic investor and JAY trying to strike a deal. One of the parties, namely JAY, has an extremely weak hand to play because of its dire financial situation. We can therefore expect the deal to be titled very much in favour of the strategic investor. But what might this mean? At least two things: (a) All three Finnish assets to be included in the deal (b) The strategic investor to become the majority owner of the three combined assets.

In all probability, the ​strategic investor is a major miner from a Nordic country (e.g. LKAB from Sweden). The options for the deal are (a) A traditional farming JV arrangement (like what JAY had with Rio Tinto) or (b) ​Something else. If it's something else, what could be the nature of the deal? One of the possible arrangements ​could be to create a new junior mining company focused on battery metals. For ease of reference, I will name the hypothetical company as Finland Minerals (FM). All of the licences relating to Enonkoski, Hammaslahti and Outokumpu are to be transferred to Finland Minerals (the licences are currently held by JAY's 100% owned subsidiaries FinnAust Mining Finland Oy and FinnAust Mining Northern Oy). Because of JAY's weak situation, the major miner ​is to become ​a substantial majority owner of Finland Minerals (at least 60% ownership). In return, JAY would be NOT required to provide any cash injection into Finland Minerals until all drilling activities have been completed and Mineral Resources Estimates (MREs) for the three assets established. Once the MREs are in place, and if they prove the assets to be worthy of being commercial projects, JAY and the major miner to undertake a stock market listing of Finland Minerals​, ​promoting it as an entity that is focused on EV battery metals, in order to raise the necessary funds to turn the three assets into producing mines. In his video interview on 28/09/23, RE said a 10 Million Tonne M&I ​resource (Measured and Indicated)​, at a good grade​, would make Hammaslahti a mine (24:30 mins into the video) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgIt_T6SJ08

I expect the deal between the strategic investor and JAY to be long-term in ​duration (Note: the current JV with KoBold JV is for 3 years and the now defunct Rio Tinto JV was for 9 years).

All in the name of speculation!

PS: Did anyone notice that at the FEM conference currently underway LKAB is present along with JAY as exhibitors (Booths A4 and A6 respectively) - https://femconference.fi/fem-2023-exhibitors

January 2022 - Independent Research also came up with a valuation for Dundas (page 2) - https://tinyurl.com/ycxe6ebw

So disappointing that Dundas is no longer a flagship project and worse a non-priority project now.

HereforHemo - If you are not already aware​, Hannam & Partners came up with some valuations​ in December 2020 and May 2021.

December 2020 - See "valuation" (page 1) - https://tinyurl.com/mscyz4pc

May 2021 - See "valuation" (page 1) - https://tinyurl.com/47uddrk5