Member Info for ACKER

This is the main reason I have decided to withdraw my posts.

This BB is turning nasty and personal.

For the record, I have posted alongside Snowking for many, many years; we have agreed, strongly disagreed and discussed common ground.

The gentleman has my support and respect.

Acker

Posted what I want to say.

Taking a break now.

Regards

Acker

What can be on offer should Zulu complies

Here’s a **short, clean, LSE‑ready post** that highlights the benefits to Premier if a Glencore/Rio Tinto merger ever materialised. It avoids hype, sticks to logic, and frames Premier as a beneficiary rather than a target.

---

**If Glencore and Rio Tinto ever merged, Premier would actually be in a stronger position, not a weaker one.**

A combined Glencore/Rio would be under huge pressure to secure long‑term critical‑mineral supply, especially lithium. Zulu would suddenly sit in a far more strategic place on their radar for three reasons:

**1. Bigger balance sheet = easier funding**

A merged major could support Zulu with:

- prepayments

- JV capital

- infrastructure support

- downstream partnerships

This removes the early‑stage funding pressure Premier faces.

**2. They need African lithium exposure**

Rio has almost no African lithium footprint.

Glencore has reach but no producing lithium asset.

Zulu becomes a low‑cost, ready‑to‑scale foothold.

**3. Stronger negotiating power with China**

A Glencore/Rio entity would want diversified supply chains, not total reliance on Chinese converters. Supporting Zulu strengthens their hand and reduces dependency.

**4. Premier becomes a strategic bolt‑on, not a takeover target**

Majors don’t need to buy Premier outright.

They prefer:

- minority stakes

- JV structures

- offtake agreements

- shared development risk

That leaves Premier intact but well‑funded.

In short, a Glencore/Rio merger would increase the pool of capital, increase the strategic value of Zulu, and make it far easier for Premier to secure long‑term backing. It’s one of the few macro scenarios where Premier actually gains leverage rather than loses it.

---

Yum,yum

Acker

Looking like all the ducks are lining up for a Rio takeover

5 Feb is the deadline

Interesting times.

Acker

Gold Duck

If I may reply,Canmax didn’t extend the longstop out of generosity — they extended it because calling in the debt would have damaged their own strategic position.

If they’d pulled the trigger:

• Zulu collapses

• Premier goes into administration

• the asset gets frozen

• another major (Glencore, Huayou, CATL etc.) picks it up for pennies

• Canmax loses its feedstock and its entire investment

That’s not a win for them.

The extension simply tells you that Canmax has seen enough operational progress at Zulu to justify patience. They want the mine producing, not liquidated.

And on the “no concessions” point — the concession is the operational progress. Once the plant is running, producing at grade and showing recoveries, that’s worth far more to Canmax than adding another penalty clause. They need tonnes, not paperwork.

Calling in the debt is a message‑board fantasy. In the real world, it would have been the worst possible outcome for Canmax. Extending the longstop keeps their supply chain intact and protects their investment.

That’s the commercial logic behind it.

Just my take on it.

Acker

Jag

Not talking about shares in issue, I'm talking about the EGM giving authority to increase the shares available.

The share count only increases when shares are actually issued — an EGM simply creates headroom, it doesn’t add a single share to the market.

People keep mixing up authorised shares with issued shares.

If Premier calls an EGM, all that happens is:

• shareholders give the board permission to issue up to a certain number of shares

• those shares sit in a pool

• they do not exist until the board actually allots them

• There is zero dilution until that moment

It’s just governance housekeeping so the company can raise capital if and when needed.

On the dilution point: yes, any raise adds shares — but the alternative is worse. Without headroom, the company can’t rise at all, which risks a shutdown during commissioning. A functioning mine with a larger share count is still worth more than a stalled mine with fewer shares.

It is prudent to carry an unallocated, unissued share pool.

Acker

Shall we all just wait and see rather than cause an internal conflict,it could go on for ages.

Just use the filter button.

Acker

Raaydaar

And the relentless smear campaign did what for shareholders? The same problem exists with any "ramping" post is quickly dismissed as garbage, yet a continuous theme of delisting, bankruptcy is applauded.

I tend to agree with Gold Duck that upon completion of requirements, funds will be quickly made available. I also agree that negotiations are close to a conclusion.

Acker

Jag

I always feel that it is prudent for a company to hold a share "pool" so yes i would agree a call for an EGM.

A realistic EGM package for Premier is 40–55% total headroom, split across core allotment, additional allotment, and a ring‑fenced strategic pool — giving the company enough flexibility to survive 2026 without another emergency vote.

My cash flow predictions for 2026 look rather lean up to late Q4, should the Trading House delay investment Hill may have to revert to placings to "stop gap " the cash flow void periods.

Acker

I think there will be a quick $500,000 placement.

The consequences will be minimal; any drop in SP to accommodate the discount will be quickly rectified as shareholders buy the discount.

The status quo will be resumed within days.

Acker

Profit

I am confident that Graham Hill will resolve the 3-month issue; I have no worries or concerns about his abilities. I do not agree with your "One step at a time" approach; commercial business does not allow for such luxury.

I am more connected to the future, the business opportunities that are being presented to Prem, the most for the next 3,5 and even 10 years, who the players will be, geo politics, supply/demand issues

Your comment that 2027 is still far away really does highlight the difference in our thinking.

Acker

ProfitBags

Reading your post you must be a bloody useless project manager.

You say that the anticipated commercial output will resolve Prems cash problem without assistance,have you actually read the agreement with Canmax.

If investors stay away then Prem will face colossal cash problems throughout most of the year.

And what project manager would ignore the importance of the 2027 Zimbabwe government regulations,are you going to sit on your backside until 31/12/2026 then wake up to the fact that Premier requires a refinery and will have to move all SC6 production 165km to toll another refinery during own refinery construction.

Hill will get Prem through the current problems.

Acker

Jag

Cannot argue with your figures, reading the same page.

Acker

Jag

May I ask you the same questions? When are you expecting the next placement, at what price and how will funds be allocated

Acker

ProfitBags

I totally disagree; however, I would be pleased to read your suggested economic policy over the next three months.

Acker

Well here we go again:

Up $110 to a fantastic $2090 {5.56%]

Get in there.

Acker,

“Miners selling rocks make pennies. Companies producing chemicals make pounds. That’s why Premier’s involvement in a lithium‑hydroxide plant is transformational — it moves us up the value chain.”

Acker

Zimbabwe is in the strongest position in Africa for lithium‑hydroxide production.

Other African countries are still at early study or pilot‑plant stage, but Zimbabwe already has multiple producing lithium mines (Bikita, Arcadia, Sabi Star, Zulu, Sandawana) and a government pushing hard for value‑addition by 2027. That combination of feedstock + policy support is unique on the continent.

A LiOH plant in Zimbabwe benefits Premier because:

• it guarantees long‑term demand for Zulu’s concentrate

• it delivers far higher margins than selling SC6

• it aligns Premier with national industrial strategy

• it strengthens relationships with major partners

• it increases Premier’s valuation and takeover appeal

Zimbabwe is the most likely African hub for lithium chemicals, and Premier is one of the few companies already positioned inside that ecosystem.

Acker

The key benefit of Premier being involved in a Lithium Hydroxide plant is simple: it moves the company up the value chain.

Instead of just selling SC6 concentrate at the lowest margin point, Premier would gain exposure to the far higher margins in battery‑grade chemicals. It also secures long‑term demand for Zulu’s feedstock, strengthens relationships with strategic partners, and aligns Premier directly with Zimbabwe’s value‑addition policy.

A LiOH plant means:

• higher margins

• stable, long‑term offtake

• stronger government support

• easier expansion of new lithium assets

• a much higher valuation multiple

It turns Premier from a single‑asset miner into a vertically integrated battery‑materials company.

Acker

Reasons I agree with "Gold Duck" and Snowking

) Why Glencore fits the profile perfectly

Glencore is one of the few global players that:

• Has the balance sheet to drop $30m without blinking

• Has a trading arm hungry for battery metals

• Has a history of taking strategic stakes in juniors

• Prefers offtake + financing + influence, not full ownership

• Loves distressed or under‑capitalised assets they can stabilise and monetise

And crucially:

Glencore has no meaningful lithium position.

They’ve been looking for an entry point for years.

Zulu is:

• Cheap

• High‑grade

• Strategically located

• Already tied to a major Chinese refiner

• In a country pushing for value‑addition

It’s exactly the kind of “early‑stage but de‑risked” asset Glencore likes to anchor.

2) Why Glencore talking to Rio Tinto is a big signal

Rio Tinto is aggressively building a lithium portfolio:

• Jadar (Serbia)

• Rincon (Argentina)

• Exploration in the US and Australia

But Rio lacks:

• A strong African lithium footprint

• A trading arm

• A Chinese downstream partner

Glencore, on the other hand:

• Has the trading network

• Has the logistics

• Has the political reach

• Has the capital

• Has the appetite for complex jurisdictions

A Glencore–Rio conversation suggests they are exploring joint lithium strategies, not competing ones.

That could include:

• Shared refining

• Shared offtake

• Shared African supply chains

• Shared investment in juniors

And Zulu is exactly the kind of asset that fits a Glencore‑led entry.

3) What this means for Premier and Zulu

If Glencore is the trading‑house investor, the implications are huge:

A) Cash‑flow crisis disappears instantly

A $30m injection from Glencore is pocket change for them.

It stabilises Zulu for two years.

B) Canmax debt becomes a non‑issue

Glencore could:

• Pay down a chunk

• Renegotiate terms

• Co‑fund a refinery

• Or even buy part of the debt

Canmax would welcome this — it derisks their supply chain.

C) Zimbabwe would approve EPOs faster

Glencore has:

• Enormous political reach

• A long history in African jurisdictions

• A reputation for delivering value‑addition

Zimbabwe wants:

• Refining

• Jobs

• Big‑name partners

Glencore ticks every box.

D) A lithium‑hydroxide plant becomes inevitable

Glencore + Canmax + Zimbabwe =

A downstream JV is almost guaranteed.

E) Premier’s valuation would re‑rate dramatically

A Glencore strategic stake is a credibility stamp that transforms the market’s perception of Zulu.

The strategic picture

If Glencore is indeed the investor:

• Premier becomes financially stable

• Canmax becomes more secure

• Zimbabwe gets value‑addition

• Glencore gets lithium exposure

• Rio Tinto gets a potential partner

• Zulu becomes a multi‑decade asset

It’s one of the few scena