Member Info for Bickmaster84

We don't need someone who can build a mine. And we don't need someone who can do a JV at this stage. All we should be doing with approaches from third parties at this stage is asking them to make their offers and turning them down unless we have something substantial. We have a few billion shares in the tank which will be able to raise a good few £m to get the DFS most of the way there.

The big issue is we don't have someone who can do a DFS. There are a good few posters on here who are already convinced the DFS is a walk in the park and nothing can go wrong. Unfortunately I have seen this time and time again with GR. He has a track record of failure and blaming others for it. We should still be focussing on the short term deliverables and understanding why it is going pear shaped in front of our eyes. Its been 8 months since the DFS was granted and less than 20% of the drilling has been completed. We have had unverified results from a single test hole. That is less than 1% of the testing which needs to be done. When the other 5 holes arrive it will take us to approximately 4%.

It is nice to see the price of Lithium in a good place but I won't be paying it too much notice until we are past 80% of drilling/testing competed. With GRs track record it is likely the market will take a similar view.

I will say it again for those who glaze over it. 8 months since EPO grant and we have less than 20% of drilling done with only 3 rigs on the ground and less than 1% of the testing work completed (unverified). And that is all before the DFS modelling and reporting is done which will take a few more months.

Snowking posted below saying it is all straightforward and pretty simple. If it is so simple then why are we where we are now.

The potential here is lifechanging for most, myself included. Let's hope GR is focussing on the near term. There is too much at stake for him to mess it up.

Bickmaster

It does raise the question about whether LIBS will be used going forward. If not the DFS will be more expensive but it will potentially be quicker. It would also mean that expanding the lab capacity on site is likely to be a waste of time and money.

All questions which it would be nice to have answers to. If only there was a way for the company to communicate with shareholders...

Indeed Wolf,

To steal the quote Acker used earlier from the last RNS.

"We have submitted sample material from the first 5 bore holes to independent laboratories for definitive assay and will be using these results to specifically validate and calibrate our LIBS system which will facilitate a better turn-around as we progress. I do not have an indication of the time that the laboratory will require to process the 159 samples submitted but I will update as soon as I do."

This is very badly written as it doesn't tell use whether the samples went through LIBS before being sent off site or whether they have been sent off site and will be run through LIBS when they come back. I've also just noticed for the first time it refers to 'independent laboratories' rather than an independent laboratory. Why would they need to send the samples to more than one laboratory. The patchwork quilt is getting more colourful by the RNS.

GR needs to sort this out and, for once in his life, start providing accurate comms.

I'm resigned to the likelihood that the SP is going nowhere while he is in charge as the market simply doesn't trust him. I don't either.

Bickmaster

@Alert

In your post last night you stated 'There were 159 samples sent for analysis, from 5 cores. That’s a high number of samples from 5 cores, (if you take an average it is 31.8 per bore hole. This suggests that libs had been pretty good at picking up very good samples that they chose send off for verification.'

If the 159 samples had been tested by LIBS why would GR not have released the results to the market?

My view is they haven't been tested.

Bickmaster

If its a decision between raising via placing now at ~0.16 or waiting a few weeks and maybe placing at 0.20 then get the funds raised now. 500m shares should see us over to early 2022. We cannot let lack of funds impede work on the DFS, even for a few weeks, if there is to be any chance of getting the DFS finished in 2022. My personal expectation is it will be early to mid 2023.

Bickmaster

Snowking

Has the suggestion the assay results are being completed next week come from PREM or is that your view?

Do you know where they are being tested?

Bickmaster

Profitbags

We are singing off the same hymn sheet. I work on large infrastructure projects where having a defined plan to delivery is sacrosanct. Plans obviously change but you cant manage those changes and risk/opportunities unless you have the plan in the first place. I think George has a number of plans but nothing is written down and he makes changes on a daily basis. The comms from PREM would certainly suggest that and as a result the market doesn't trust him. Unfortunately it means there will always be a weight holding the SP back. But it is in his gift to change it for the better but letting us know what the plan actually is.

Bickmaster

Aimisalaugh,

The strong lithium prices are great to see, but as you say infer are largely irrelevant as we are so far away from DFS completion. They should however place on emphasis on securing future resources asap for the big mining companies and should contribute towards a good price being paid.

All the focus now needs to be on DFS and getting samples out the ground and tested and verified to have any chance of 2022 completion. I imagine we will also see a placing in the next week or two. Indeed I would welcome one of to raise enough money to take us until early 2022. Obviously if there was some news which would take us up to 0.22 or thereabouts it would mean the placing could be done at the 0.20p level rather than the ~0.16p level which we would see if a placing was done today.

Looking forward to the next news on this. For a lot of companies it is possible to have a good idea of what news is to be expected as they (1) share their plans with their investors and the market and (2) Stick to those plans. With PREM unfortunately there is always a guessing game in terms of what news we will get and when we will get it.

Bickmaster

Snowking, yes that is basically what I said in my post last night but what you just posted is contrary to what was said in the London meeting which you referred to in your comment to Acker earlier. George at no point mentioned sending off samples for external verification before running them through LIBS and explained a few times the steps they take to ensure LIBS is calibrated using the already verified samples they have in the lab. Hence, why I provided clarification. It would be beneficial if you took a little longer to compose your posts as the majority of them are inconsistent with what was said at the London meeting or in RNSs. If you are being factual please make sure the information is accurate. It would help to avoid confusion.

Bickmaster

Snowking, at the London meeting LiBS and external verification were both discussed at length, along with the link between them. However the reasons stated in the RNS are significantly at odds with what was discussed. We were told the lab already had verified samples for calibration, not that a batch of samples would be sent off for verification before running them through LiBS. I can’t let you away with comments which are not accurate.

Acker,

The key benefit of libs is cost reduction. For each sample (i.e. each chunk of mineralisation in a drilled core sample) the prep work (logging, splitting, quartering, grinding, pulverising, homogenising etc) is done on site and the product is effectively a 'hockey puck' of sample. It means that you can send a fairly large number of samples off to the lab to be tested in a relatively small shipment. It also means the majority of the dog work is done up front. Sections of each section of mineralisation are retained in the event a purchaser (a) wants to see them or (b) wants to independently verify them themselves through their own lab of preference. You wouldn't expect any less for what could be a X hundred million transaction.

I believe Wolf's comment from earlier may have some relevance - that interested parties want independently verified results. Hopefully that is the case. I am sure a lot of parties have learned lessons from the likes of Uramin in the past.

I also fully agree with Alert's comments that it is better to be doing this now at the start of the testing programme rather than at the back end, which would incur a hell of a lot of cost and also result in additional delays.

I am still firmly of the opinion that the speed of drilling is what is going to be the key determinant of the programme, not the testing. You can't do the testing until the cores are out of the ground. Obviously it helps if the testing isn't running too far behind the drilling so you can verify the results and that the drilling is being done in the right area, though with Lithium this is less of an issue as the mineralisation is visible and the geotechs will see it as they pull the cores out of the ground.

Time for bed. Early train to catch.

Bickmaster**

**Still not Val

I missed the map as well. This is what PREM needs to be tweeting about as it demonstrates the potential of Zulu. Not the ‘Meet the Team’ they tweeted today which shows just how weak their team is or the June Corporate Presentation.

RHA, MNH, circum. We’ve heard it all before.

Zulu is too much of an opportunity to make the same mistakes again. The other opportunities are minuscule compared to it. But it appears at this early stage that plenty of mistakes are being made and GR is not learning. That’s why I post the issues and queries on here. I would have asked them in the WhatsApp or Telegram groups if I have as in them but I don’t have any other avenue.

It should be clear these are valid issues which pose risk to us making a return here. If I wanted to deramp there are much easier ways to do it.

Cheers Acker,

Yes, quite a departure in the space of a few weeks and very few are questioning why. To be honest I am not sure most will have actually noticed.

Fortunately we don't need to worry about these small details as the calculations done by Snowking and Co show the value per share should be approx 7p when the DFS is finished in Q3 2022 and all is on track. It should just be a case of sitting back and waiting for it all to fall into place given PREM's track record of focussed delivery.

Bickmaster**

**Getting more like Val by the day

Johnny

RNS states the following. 'We have submitted sample material from the first 5 bore holes to independent laboratories for definitive assay and will be using these results to specifically validate and calibrate our LIBS system which will facilitate a better turn-around as we progress. I do not have an indication of the time that the laboratory will require to process the 159 samples submitted but I will update as soon as I do'.

GR should have told us where the lab was and when the samples were sent but as ever the RNS is written in general terms and lacks detail.

This also raises a question about the accuracy of LIBS. He spent a lot of the London meeting tell us how they used samples with a known Lithium % to ensure the LIBS system was calibrated. And in the space of two weeks there appears to have been a change of plan. It is obviously better to get this done early in the process but is a tangent from the London discussions which were focussed on preparing the samples, running them through LIBS and then getting then validated externally. Now we are getting them validated externally as the first port of call. I wonder will they run these samples through LIBS when they come back? Unfortunately it also means we wont get anything else from LIBS until we get the 159 samples back from the external lab. This doesn't mean the sample preparation has to stop.

Bickmaster

In the London meeting GR said there wasn’t anywhere in Zim to do the testing. Sample would need to leave the country which requires an export licence which takes time. Hence the reason for using LIBS. The samples which have been through LIBS are much smaller and easier to send for testing.

Ivans

When you say 'the formal drilling result' in your post below, what exactly do you mean and what are you expecting?

Bickmaster**

**Still not Val

Newtrader,

Just a quick response to your message from 22.59 last night where you said 'But now it seems you have an agenda and constantly bash whatever prem does'.

The reason I pick up the issues is because there are still a lot of major issues which need to be addressed. The potential here is huge but the risk profile is much higher than it needs to be because GR isn't managing risk very well and has always had an approach of telling investors what they want to hear while doing something different.

I did say it was good to get the extracts from the drilling logs showing the mineralisation. But these are very basic and we were promised more. We were also told how good LIBS was when in London and now the company are taking the steps to go straight to independent verification. Another departure from what we were told in London.

Drilling progress is very slow and based on current progress we will still be drilling in early 2023, never mind finishing off the DFS in Q3, 2022.

And the MNH saga will continue to play out in the background. Anyone who though we would spike today from the RNS doesn't know or understand this company. Clear up the MNH uncertainty and this should fly on good news. While MNH is still unresolved it will hold SP back.

Am I going to change my tone? No, not unless the company starts delivering results, reducing risk and improving comms. If you want to get the rose tinted version of the world you can always just read Snowking's or Degrasse's posts.

Bickmaster **

**still not Val

Profitbags,

Good post. There were some positives in the RNS but, as you say, it glosses over a lot of the issues. (Similar to Snowking glossing over the issues from the London meeting when he updated this group. Somehow he forgot to mentioned MNH in his update...)

Snowking, great to see you topping up again this morning. Which buys were yours? Shame you coudn't have told us beforehand which buys to watch out for.

Degrasse, good to see your detective skills are as accurate as your charting predictions. I've was singing 'You can call me Val' in the style of Paul Simon after rading your posts yesterday.

Bickmaster (or is it Val)**

**it's not.

Definitely won’t be adding in the morning!!