Member Info for Bannor

Given that they'll have had the weekend to dissect it fully - might well dictate what I do on Monday 😁

...if anyone could be bothered to read the RNS (or the post title) before posing!! ... there is no cash consideration (i.e. it is not a cash raise as such) it is an issuance of shares as a settlement of debt, the 20c issue price is irrelevant really & just an arbitrary value as EMH shares do not carry a Nominal value ... Extract for issue reason below:

"The shares are being issued as non-cash consideration under a loan facility agreement, in lieu of cash fees or interest."

Just work with fact & whilst you might want to engage in the hype or BS posted on these boards - you'd be wise to take it all with a pinch of salt until formal RNS/notifications are issued & for anyone who hasn't worked it out yet KC has absolutely no control, say or influence on when (or if (if you prefer)) ... the DFS is made public ....

Https://cdn-api.markitdigital.com/apiman-gateway/ASX/asx-research/1.0/file/2924-03040086-6A1304577&v=undefined

... below is the text if the decision for procedural note 4 when MX govt tried to get it suspended due to the ongoing dispute with COE's estate ... be interesting to see what they've argued for this time when it's all published .....

==============

DECISION

44. Based on the above considerations, the Tribunal:

(i) Rejects the Respondent’s Request for Suspension in its entirety, without prejudice to the

Parties’ right to seek a revision this Procedural Order before this Tribunal if circumstances

change, or to file an application to suspend the proceeding before the Consolidation Tribunal;

(ii) Orders the Parties to comply with the deadlines set forth in “Scenario 2” of the Procedural

Timetable of Procedural Order No. 1;

(iii) Instructs the Parties to resume discussions on the outstanding deadlines in “Scenario 2” of

the Procedural Timetable, including the scheduling of the hearing dates, and to submit a joint

proposal to the Tribunal within 10 days from this Order;

(iv) Dismisses all other requests.

...another procedural note issued, Mexico still trying to get the process suspended it seems ...

-------

:

December 11, 2025 - The Tribunal issues Procedural Order No. 5 concerning the Respondent’s request for suspension of the proceeding.

----

& once again I don't think for one minute it'll be because an agreement is close between the parties & just another attempt by Mexico to delay/stop the case ....

Yes - I suppose that's one label you could use🤔

Especially as we've NOW made a payment with the promise (agreement) of more to come ....

& good for Tucano & I suspect they'll be 100% behind us as well ... especially as we've not made a payment with the agreement of more to come!!!

... Of course & I agree everything must be done entirely legally otherwise it creates future risk...

My point is that these 'legacy payments' were not part of the 2019 JRP & only came to light after the application for the licences ... if I were a cyncic (& I am) I'd say it just smacks to me of someone(s) wanting a slice of the pie as a 'sweetener' & the promise of smoother approvals processes ... but there it is & we weren't informed of it & we'll probably (hopefully) not have any more of what were to me unexpected & unwanted surprises.

As I said roll on development or sale sooner rather than later ....

..... Yes & as I thought these obstacles (& the payments required to remove them) weren't previously announced or communicated to us as shareholders .... the discussions around this weren't even started until late 2024 after we'd submitted the applications & all the delay was placed on the requirement for studies & administrative tasks .... disappointed this wasn't made clearer at the time but happy it seems to be behind us, also explains why the need to raise so much so quickly after the AGM failed to get the placing authority over the line as well ....

Hey ho get it going or get it sold - I don't much care which so long as it's soon ...

.... to be blunt it yesterday's RNS hasn't changed anything in regards to timings or requirements for Azteca ... although it apparently removed some 'obstacles' I'm not sure we as shareholders knew too much about .... also until the sub 3p traders & placees (of which there are a lot) are out of the way we'll be stuck here as they offload for a quick profit ...

... I think it's clear enough that everything is on the same schedule as previously announced ... i.e. a couple of months from the definitive agreement for completion of the archeological studies required etc

Patience Mer Patience 😂

... still got some lumpy delayed sells popping up holding it down at present ... that's what happens when you issue masses of cheap shares ....hopefully that's all behind us for the foreseeable ... hoping to be out myself by mid '26 after the licences/permits are all in place ...

...you can't buy if no-ones selling ... the ASK is not as relevant to existing holders as the BID which is creeping up slowly 👍🏼

...no ...I'm guessing though that whoever it is (Gerald's ... or the banks I guess) are keen to get the ore moving again so have agreed to fund the payments for the bigger reward of selling the stockpile(s)... Just a guess though

Trust & belief ... although I'm not bothered by how quickly we get there so long as we get there

..yes however whilst this is now good it does identify that that were 'challenges' other than those we knew about (archeological survey etc) that were holding things up ... such as transport embargo restrictions & the processing of permits ... first we've heard of those as far as I know.

It's interesting to note that one of the 'creditors' holding stockpiles (Gerald's?!?) has provided the funds to settle the payments to the municipality, that's good to know too & positive .... I think 🤔.

Good update despite what for me were the revelations ... Now let's get the licences sorted 😁

... & the crowd went wild ... NOT 🤷🏼‍♂️

Conspicuously absent is a date for the visit ... will he be dressed as Santa or the Easter Bunny I wonder 🤔

What's happening with DEV ... down to 15 employees now .... if things are so supposedly imminent why are the employee numbers shrinking rather than growing?!?