Member Info for AGEOS

As will be apparent to anyone who has followed my posting history I rarely depart from any subject matter which is not verifiable from published or comparatively reliable sources. However, the recent protracted debate regarding “valuation” and possible causes for what is perceived to be an undervalued share price, prompts me to venture into what is inevitably this more problematic domain. I do so with considerable reservation as I anticipate this may not be well received by some.

EEE equity trading has, at least since the rise in share price from 29.75 on Aug 14th 2025 to 70.8 on Sept 10th, and most probably from as early as the 10.45 of May 30th, been influenced by the trading activities of a single international trading enterprise the name and activities of which is known to all who need to know and which I do not intend to disclose since to do so would risk this post being removed. Because of the proven success of this organisation its activities are followed by independent traders who will attempt to profit by trading in parallel with its activities. Evidence of its trading activities is readily identifiable if you have the relevant experience and most importantly have access to the real time and fully comprehensive London Stock Exchange data sets. All other data sources are secondary and useless for this purpose.

How do I know this. For twenty years I maintained a personal trading platform based on the London Stock Exchange's Proquote FIX 4.2 market data and trading system for which I was a registered member, on a par with brokers and banks using the same system. I have maintained LSE contacts since then and I am simply disclosing what every city trader knows but the retail investment community doesn't know.

With regard to the wider issue of “valuation” I applaud Manlord's recent valiant efforts but admit to deferment to the “markets” assessment however much it may vary according to the influence of its thousands of component traders and investors. Shares are like any other commodity, valued by what the market is prepared to pay. “Influence”, in this instance by a financially extremely powerful organisation using the most sophisticated automated trading programming available is determining the current “valuation” and as long as that remains an “influence” and does not extend to the illegality of “manipulation”, the potential increase in value should materialise as the company progresses. The relevant financial authorities will be monitoring this “influence” not just with regard to EEE but across the whole of AIM and the Main Market as the trading activities of this company are all pervasive and extensive, so we have to trust in the efficacy of such surveillance. Personally, I monitor EEE share trading daily and as near continuously as possible, especially during periods of instability in order to know what the “influencers” programmes are doing. Hopefully this requirement will diminish as news flow progresses.

AGEOS.

Continuation:

Lastly, SB's reference to converting product into “feedstock for titanium metal ”is, I assume, a reference to conversion to Titanium tetrachloride [TiCl4 see my post of 22.06.25] which would until recently have had to be exported as there were no metal producers in Australia with the necessary Kroll processing facilities. However, in 2019 Coogee Chemicals Ltd achieved full operational scale of CSIRO's TiRO titanium production technology, first proposed in 2007 as an alternative to the energy expensive Kroll process although still based on Kroll chemistry. I posted reference to the TiRO and Tivan+ Processes in 20.12.23, 11.06.23 and earlier but most recently 14.09.25.

Coogee Chemicals http://www.coogee.com.au

The TiRO process involves processing of TiCl4 in a fluidised bed reactor and production of titanium metal powder by vacuum distillation and grinding of the resulting product. In December 2022 Coogee launched their first titanium powder alloy product, Ti6-4, for use in metal parts manufacturing. Recently they added a CoogeeTitanium website and now offer small-scale production of pre-alloyed Ti-6Al-4V powder [the alloy which currently commands 75-85% of the global Ti alloy market] at their 200 tpa facility in Perth and alloy development services at a technical facility in Melbourne, Victoria.

Coogee Titanium http://www.coogeetitanium.com.au

The timing of their TiRO production process and facility could not be better aligned for a technical alliance and supply agreement with Empire. If however, as posted on 07.04.26, the Platts reported annual product target of Empire is in the 360,000-400,000 tonnes range of which part will be sent to a metal-producing partner, then Coogee would need to increase capacity considerably in the near future and greatly extend its market reach for titanium alloy products. The rapidly expanding Australian AD {Additive Manufacturing] market referred to in my 14.09.25 and other posts is precisely the market Coogee Titanium will be aiming for, including all the hundreds of specialist metal component suppliers to the major aero-space manufacturers.

AGEOS.

Continuation:

The development of a product range is of course a continuous and ever expanding process so whatever the initial product mix announced by Empire it will only be what is considered to be the most cost-effective and marketable range consistent with the initial capacity of a fully integrated single, mining, processing and production facility. Tronox, with integrated mine to production facilities in Australia but also globally, at the last count had at least 30 TiO2 pigment products on offer mostly for coating and plastic applications, a further 20 products for special applications and a range of titanium chemicals including Titanium tetrachloride TiCl4 and its derivatives, the former a feedstock for Ti metal production and for special coatings and pigments.

It took Tronox, even with its massive technical resources, thirty years to develop the 20 products for special applications alone, so I anticipate Empire's initial product range to be inevitably limited. If Tronox had not been saddled with US$3.2 billion debt and on course for strategic realignment into Rare Earth exploitation of its Australian monazite resources, it would have been an obvious choice for partnership with Empire. Indeed if the US$600M initial financing from the Export-Import Bank of the USA [EXIM] and Export Finance Australia [EFA] falls through, the Australian Government may favour such a partnership as much to support Tronox's significant Australian workforce as to exploit Pitfield.

CONT

SB's contribution to the Ignite Investment Summit, Hong Kong, April 15/16, was a useful update on progress, as summarised in Manlord's recent contribution, but as required of all such public presentations does not provide market sensitive information not already in the public domain. As ML highlighted, SB did say “We intend to completely update the MRE by about the middle of the year” [4.21min]. However that is still consistent with the previously stated objective of completion of the revised MRE during Q3. July is both mid-year and the beginning of Q3.

What struck me as especially reassuring was the confirmation of the product processing having attained the stage where he was able to say “we are looking to convert products into titanium rutile pigment …..and feedstock for titanium metal” [5.24mins], and later when referring to current industry provision, there is “only one other company which is fully integrated but its processes are spread over three sites” [9.38mins]. That confirms the spectrum of products which Empire is intending to target as being fully comprehensive and, in time, on a par with Tronox, the company I assume SB alluded to.

The specific reference to conversion of product into “titanium rutile pigment” confirms conversion of anatase, the predominant mineral form of TiO2 in the weathered saprolite zone, into rutile, the denser and thermodynamically more stable mineral form of TiO2, a transition which takes place at 600-700 degrees centigrade but can be extended to between 400-1200 degrees for special applications. Since the structural characteristics of these two TiO2 phases are different, their physicochemical properties also differ, leading to variations in performance for various applications.

I have exemplified different applications of the two phases, anatase and rutile, in several comprehensive posts [ eg 14.09.25; 22.06.25] regarding potential products for existing and various emergent technologies but in summary, the rutile phase is preferred for exterior paints and colourings, for plastics, printing inks and cosmetics, whilst anatase phase products are used in interior paints and colourings, in paper, textiles and medicines. In confirming the conversion of product into “titanium rutile pigment” we can therefore assume a product target range inclusive of both anatase and rutile phase applications, which is the maximum possible.

CONT

Aquinaga, thanks for initiating the re-post. Saves me the time of doing it as I was beginning to feel sorry for ML having to scroll through 70+ pages to find it.

Incidentally, since my original post, COSIRA have changed their acronym to CSIRO supposedly to avoid confusion with the S African Council for Scientific & Industrial Research and a medical procedure. Apparently online AI was having problems with differentiation!!

In February EEE appears to have begun providing progress reports to the Platts service of S & P Global. Platts-Pricing-News, a subsidiary of S & P Global Energy, is recognized as a leading provider of price benchmarks, news and market reports relating to commodities. Its price benchmarks are the basis for nearly 1,300 exchange-traded, cash-settled commodity futures contracts.

The fact that EEE now provides data to S & P Global presumably on the basis of its relevance to future titanium commodity pricing is a clear indication of industry acceptance of its potential influence on the global supply market.

Of the information released by Platts in February there is specific reference to an initial production target. “Empire Metals views....the annual global consumption growth...of TiO2 [which is] nearing 360,000-400,000 metric tonnes...as a logical first stage production target.” and that “part of its future feedstock output.....will be sent to a titanium metal-producing partner.” So although EEE will want to prioritise customer-specific long term supply contracts, the involvement of Platts perhaps implies the additional potential of futures contracts for less specific feedstock. So, how long before we see exchange-traded futures contracts for “Platts Pitfield TiO2 Feedstock”.

The Platts information also includes a statement that Empire will “transition from batch-testing to continuous piloting, in collaboration with local metallurgical laboratories in Perth” and “The company plans to lease one [ie a pilot plant] and have it operational by Q2 of 2026”. and that “By mid-year, it will have run the first few pilots, with trial parcels of up to 10,000 metric tonnes, generating sufficient product to engage the market.” This appears to add more precise time-lines to the piloting discussed by Manlord in his recent comprehensive update.

AGEOS.

Rupple, if “cross listing as a standard listing” is attained on the ASX then London would be maintained as the primary domestic listing in which case any move from AIM would be to the FTSE All Share, a desirable move in keeping with the anticipated increase in market capitalisation.

Thanks to all for appreciative responses.

Manlord, thanks for your account of your response from Shaun Bunn regarding the various issues you raised and for the reassurance this provides relating to those matters.

In respect of the ASX listing my understand of the most likely course of action for EEE is that of “cross-listing as a standard listing” since the only other possibility, that of “foreign exempt listing” is not available due to the net tangible asset and operating profit requirements which it cannot meet..

EEE meets the requirements for “standard listing” ie market capitalisation in excess of AU$15 million, minimum NTA [Net Tangible Assets] of AU$4 million, minimum shareholder spread and free-float and at least three years of audited accounts. An IPO [Initial Public Offering], which would complicate and delay the listing considerably, is not necessary providing a mechanism [which requires DR's 'depositary receipts' issued by London] for “cross-listing” of existing equity is in place and an Australian Prospectus is issued. A capital raise can follow later, if and when required.

DR's represents a specific number of underlying securities listed on the Home Exchange (London) and a custodian (Home Custodian) holds those shares on trust for the ASX DR Issuer. Following admission to trading, the DRs are traded on the ASX in accordance with their market trading rules and generally have the same ticker code as those on AIM..

“Cross-listing” is technically defined as “listing equity securities [shares] on one or more secondary exchanges in addition to a primary domestic listing.” So for EEE its primary domestic listing would remain London [AIM & potentially Main Market] and its secondary listings currently USA [OTC] and prospectively AUS [ASX]. The term “Dual-listing” which also appears as an option is technically defined as “listing of securities on multiple exchanges without a primary domestic exchange”. It is less commonly adopted and appears to be favoured by global conglomerates of massive market capitalisation.

I have no particular knowledge or experience of the workings of the ASX but was involved in a UK listing many years ago, so my understanding of the options open to EEE may be flawed and open to question. The above is however my assessment of the situation.

AGEOS.

Thanks Aquinaga. Always pleased to be able to add meat even though I'm a life-long vegetarian.

In a post on 31.08.2025 regarding possible by-products from Pitfield, I referred to “kaolin”, otherwise known as “china clay” as having been mentioned as such by SB during interview. Kaolin is the term used for a product with a high proportion of the mineral kaolinite, the value of which depends on the purity. As an example I mentioned Andromeda Metals, Great White Kaolin project on the Eyre Peninsula in S Australia, a halloysite-kaolinite resource with an offtake agreement of 5000 tonnes at $700 per tonne, with Japanese porcelain manufacturer Plantan Yamada.

At the time of that post I could only speculate as to the possible source of the kaolinite at Pitfield but suggested that the feldspar mineral “albite”, a component of the sandstone and siltstone bedrock, when subjected to weathering, could by removal of sodium be a precursor to kaolinite, with the aluminium silicate required provided by breakdown of chlorite. In consequence the kaolinite should be concentrated in the weathered transitional zone and the saprolite.

That is indeed what is confirmed in the “Geology and Mineralisation Style” section of the Oct 14th 2025 RNS reporting the Maiden MRE. Both the saprolite and weathered zones are described as being predominantly of the minerals “quartz and kaolin”. What proportion of the resource tonnage could be recovered as a saleable by-product is impossible to estimate on available data and there are many critical deterministic factors, so it should be considered only as a potential adjunct to the TiO2 products. There are no references to kaolin as a possible by-product in the technical appendices of the MRE report. Of the total MRE combined resource of 2.2 billion tonnes, the saprolite is 191 million tonnes and the weathered transitional zone approximately 1.0 billion tonnes, presumably with the purest kaolinite in the former.

If kaolin is to be a possible by-product, that should be confirmed with disclosure of the metallurgical flowsheets, plant processing design and product specifications, which should begin to emerge shortly during Q2.

AGEOS.

I currently have 7 on filter here so yesterday was relieved of reading over 70 green-boxed posts, However I periodically remove filters whenever an unfiltered response suggests something of possible interest. In doing so this morning a post of some significance appeared and has subsequently been removed. I have no intention of relating the content and I would advise those who did read it not to do so either. There is a legal risk of being an “accessory” to a potentially actionable incident if you do.

This is perhaps an appropriate opportunity to remind contributors that your 'freedom of speech' also includes responsibilities, and consequences if what you say is damaging to the interests of others. Twice in the last two decades I have been involved in providing evidence regarding the activities of posters, here and on ADVFN; in one case to the company affected and the other to the FSA [now FCA] and police. In the former it was a disgruntled former employee who ended up in a French court, in the latter it was an executive involved in an attempted hostile takeover who ended up being obliged to attend a Manchester law court.

Most of the EEE green-boxed content is trivial but some contributors should be mindful of the accumulative effect of their efforts. There has never been a 'class action' case of the kind commonly mounted in the USA, attempted in the UK, but there is a first time for everything and there is nothing preventing a group of wealthy investors bringing such a case against individuals who collectively can be proven, against all reasonable doubt, to have seriously damaged the prospects of a company. Always remember that whatever you post remains as potential evidence in perpetuity.

AGEOS

Thanks restingpilgrim, Rupple and Manlord for the appreciative response. In brief, Manlord, I anticipate that during the next few months there will be a series of disclosures arising from current company processing and product development studies, plus industry and governmental related initiatives, which will largely define the EEE enterprise side of the equation. The market perspective is currently in flux but of global necessity must return to a highly favourable trend.

The enormity of the resource, the unrivalled grade and purity and the highly favourable extraction economics are beyond question. Both processing and product development, likewise are gravitating towards the simplest and most cost effective end of the spectrum. Global markets will ensure future product demand. On that basis all the ingredients exist for a highly successful mining and product development industry in one of the most favourable locations on Earth.

I cannot believe that the Australian Government will fail to recognise the potential, not only for hosting the world's premier supplier of TiO2 feedstock to advanced technical economies but even more importantly, to having the means to develop a national complex of new high-tech industries based on a multi-generational supply of resource. In such a supportive climate the necessary funding for EEE development would be readily accessible and market capitalisation potentially in multiple billions.

AGEOS.

Continuation:

If you are able to enlarge and improve the definition of Fig 5 it will reveal a granularity which indicates the degree to which TiO2 % varies laterally on a 'total hole' basis. The degree of that variation is such as to explain why the MRE categorised most of the resource as 'indicated' and so little as 'measured' since variogram analysis did not achieve the required level of lateral continuity to satisfy the standard criteria for 'measured'. That is contrary to what I was expecting of an in-situ saprolitic type deposit and why, in a detailed 19.08.2025 post [which includes much of relevance to this post] I suggested the possibility of 'measured' being a significant proportion of the total resource. I did not attempt to explain in that post the basis on which a saprolitic type deposit would be evaluated as measured, indicated or inferred as it involves 'integrated facies analysis', difficult to understand even for a specialist. Also, providing the TiO2 % is above the cut-off, assay grades have no relevance in such analysis and consequent evaluation, so those who have interpreted these Thomas DD results on that basis are wholly misguided.

As difficult as this may be to comprehend, it will I hope provide some indication of the extent to which the high-grade TiO2 intercepts revealed in the eight DD holes, are probably replicated throughout much of the 5km x 1.25km central zone at Thomas as indicated by some of the drilling previously completed and soon to be supplemented by the current more comprehensive drill program. Whilst the economic significance of high-grade near surface intercepts at Thomas has in consequence been highlighted, bear in mind that Cosgrove, potentially much larger in area and with demonstrably higher TiO2 grades, remains relatively unexplored. There is a high probability that significant high-grade near-surface zones will also be found at Cosgrove as a result of the current drill program.

AGEOS.

Continuation:

Hole 009 was drilled [probably at c90 degrees, as for all DD holes] to 101.2m total depth through 2.1m of top-soil and/or laterite [ Fe & quartz rich], 56.2m of weathered [saprolite] zone and 42.9m of transition zone into bedrock. The 99.1m [excluding 2.1m top-soil] total of core, gave an average TiO2 assay of 5.38%, and the 56.2m weathered zone an average of 6.55% of which a 9.3m interval from 26.2m to 35.5m gave an average of 10.13%. This may seem to be an unnecessarily wordy description but it is intentionally so to ensure accuracy of understanding. It is surprising how many do not understand this core-log data. For example, hole 009 has been cited as the highest TiO2 assayed hole in the central zone, presumably on the basis of the 10.13% intercept whilst disregarding the 5.38% for the total, a grossly inaccurate interpretation of the data. There are many holes in the central zone which exceed this total-hole assay and which, as I will exemplify on 'probabilistic' evidence, will surpass the 10% assay for intercepts.

Now for the “high-grade central zone”, shown diagrammatically as Fig 2 in RNS August 18th 2025, as the area between the two N-S black lines which includes all the holes assayed at 5-6% and 6%+ of which the 23 holes listed in Table 2 produced substantial intercepts [often total depth] above 6%, including two with 6m intervals above 12%. The 7 holes with above 7% TiO2 can be assumed on 'probabilistic analysis' to include narrow intercepts above 10%. The area of this central zone conforms with the 5km x 1.25km dimensions given in the recent RNS. The extent and potential productive capacity of this central zone is further developed in the October 14th 2025 MRE RNS in Fig 5 on page 8 which shows the extent of the 4.5-6.5%, 6.5-9.5% and 9.5%+ TiO2 assessment for Thomas.

TBC

The recent RNS regarding assay results from the Nov/Dec diamond drilling at the Thomas Prospect has understandably focussed attention on those eight holes and the near surface high grade TiO2 intervals which they reveal. This is despite the primary purpose of these DD holes being the recovery of intact cores for metallurgical, petrological, geochemical and other geotechnical purposes which are still in progress. Hence my assumption, posted on 26th Feb, that the DD results would most likely be delayed to form part of a comprehensive geotechnical report has proven unfounded, most probably for reasons of timing. The resulting RNS is still of value in high-lighting the high grade TiO2 intercepts in some of the eight holes, as Shaun Bunn has emphasised, both in his published remarks and at interview. His emphasis on the economic significance of being able to exploit near surface very high grade deposits from day one of operations cannot be over stated.

In that latter respect there is a significant amount of data regarding the aerial extent of those high grade deposits inherent in previous RNS releases which most investors are probably unaware of, or which is perhaps not fully understood by those who are aware. It seems very timely to review that data now that the importance of this aspect of the mineral resource is in focus. This will require access to, and detailed attention to, several maps in those RNS releases, for which enlargement and improved definition is desirable and without which what follows will be difficult to understand.

Firstly however, the March 17th RNS lists as “highlights”, that the eight DD holes confirm “the presence of a high-grade central zone at the Thomas Prospect” and “very high grade TiO2 intervals identified near surface within the weathered zone” citing holes 009 & 012 as examples. It also adds holes 013, 010, 009 & 012 as providing “selected high-grade intercepts.... within the in-situ weathered cap”. These results are then signified as “support in targeting the high-grade central zones for infill drilling” and other work. In the subsequent discussion the “high-grade central zone” is defined as “an area of at least 5km long and 1.25km wide”[page 2, below Fig 1 Location Map]. Table 1, itemising “Total drill hole and weathered zone intercepts” is important in understanding the context of the high-grade intercepts, which can be illustrated with one of the holes highlighted.

TBC

Manlord, decades ago since I last handled cores and sample labelling is different now. However, on reassessment I think you will have to alter your interpretation. HD is the core depth at which the sample was taken, not the end of hole depth and D is the length of sample taken. R, I presume is the length of core sample retained since the cores appear to have been halved. Thus the hole exemplified, number 10, was sampled from 17.2m [ 17m is marked on the core] to 18.7m [1.5m core sample halved]. Total depth of number 10 was in fact 68.2m.

Thanks for your thoughts on today's RNS with which I totally concur.

AGEOS.

Licence area E70/6320 acquired in 2022 and situated in the north of Pitfield was briefly mentioned in the 02.03.2026 post as hosting 10 of the planned exploratory holes. As these are located at the north-eastern limit of the Yandanooka Basin where Permian-age sedimentary rocks are shown on geological maps as occupying the western downthrow side of the Darling Fault, there was no apparent reason for the drill hole locations. I therefore suggested that the Three Springs Ni-Cu-PGE Project which I should have attributed to Sirius 2 [not SR] Resources, might be relevant, which indeed could prove to be so. This had targeted in 2022, several magnetic anomalies with surface geochemical analysis, identifying nickel-copper-platinum and palladium concentrations indicative of mafic-ultramafic [magnesium & iron rich] igneous intrusions. No further investigation was pursued due to priorities elsewhere.

With reference to the aerial magnetic imagery used by Sirius 2 there is a magnetic high located within or adjacent to the Darling Fault zone continuous with that which appears to coincide with the northward extension of the Fault into the 6320 licence area, and 3 of the drill holes are within that magnetic high. The other 6 drill holes are also located on what appear to be relative magnetic highs and apparently drilling through only thin Permian-age cover. In conclusion, the location of all 10 drill-holes suggests that magnetic anomalies possibly indicative of magnesium/iron rich igneous intrusions with associated Ni-Cu-PGE mineralisation may be the targets.

As also exemplified by the previously posted southerly extension of the Darling Fault, included in licence 6323, this aspect of the current drilling campaign is only of marginal interest to the main objective. However, although its purpose will in part be to meet the minimum work requirements necessary to retain the licence, it also indicates the possible diversity of mineralogical prospects available within the total licence area.

AGEOS..

Katia, I'm sure I can speak for Manlord also in thanking you for your appreciative words. My thanks also to 'ezerscrooge' for your continue support and to others similarly inclined. It all helps at those times when self doubt as to the value of ones efforts inevitably arises.

Your September 2025 expose, Katia, of the probable GWJ/Jane Street EEE price manipulation was especially useful at the time. As there are suspicions of further similar influences more recently, if you uncover any evidence in that respect please post it here as it may be of interest to the FCA.

In the meantime I'm unable to oblige with “a post a day” but another effort follows.

As part of my 02.03.2026 post regarding the 'Current Drilling Campaign' I briefly referred to Licence area E70/6323 acquired in 2022 and comprising around 25% of the total area held but which featured only marginally in this campaign with 3 holes included, due to its mainly southerly extension. I also mentioned that it incorporated a continuation of the Darling Fault and was adjacent to an area newly recognised as the West Yilgarn Ni-Cu-PGE [Platinum Group Elements] mineralogical province and to areas under licence to Chalice Mining as part of its Barrabarra Project.

I now understand that Chalice currently have several high priority AC drill programs in progress in the Barrabarra licence area, targeting gold-copper anomalies. Although the locations are undisclosed, the area east of and adjacent to EEE's 6323 licence could be of interest, as any igneous intrusion or emplacement related to the Darling Fault might be a suitable target. Also of interest is the fact that EEE's 6323 licence area includes the Buckingham, Nivens and Haigs “talc prospects”, part of a 70km southerly extension from the world's second largest talc mine 12km NE of Three Springs. The talc [magnesium carbonate] was formed by hydrothermal alteration of magnesium rich limestone [dolomite] by fluids from dolerite intrusions associated with the Darling Fault.

Whilst this is only of marginal interest relative to EEE's titanium prospect, it indicates potential for future diversification. In that respect Chalice Mining provides a useful comparison to EEE in that its program of exploratory drilling is taking place in parallel with development of its Gonneville Palladium-Nickel-Copper Project, a globally significant critical minerals prospect with similarities, in terms of development and strategic significance, with Pitfield. A subject, maybe, for further consideration.

AGEOS.

Thanks 'microscope' for the kind invitation.

I'm unsure at present about extending my contributions beyond LSE, limited as they are, as I have a lot of demands on my time.

However, have noted your contact details and will be in touch if I decide to join.