Member Info for BritishPeculeum

Disco

So I would recommend that you have a look at the original Nov 2016 Carry Agreement between PXC and EXG, and perhaps the original option agreement between the parties to better understand the relationship between PXC and EXG.

But essentially, my understanding is that all mining and mineral rights that are vested in PXC today are actually held in a holding company Konnex Resources Inc. where PXC holds 80% of the shares and ExGen Resources holds 20%.

Originally the interest in the Empire Mine was held 100% by Boxxer Gold Inc. (now ExGen Resources Inc.). These assets were then vested in Konnex Resources, and then in around Nov 2016, PXC acquired 80% of the share capital of Konnex Resources. ExGen retained the 20% balance of Konnex on a fully carried basis, and later, Jason Riley, CEO of ExGen Resources, retained a seat on the Board of PXC.

The inclusion of the surrounding historic mines (Horseshoe, White Knob, Blue Bird) came later as part of claim acquisitions / expansions after PXC took control, but as far as I am aware, the expanded claims are held in Konnex, not in PXC per se, and thus held on the same 80/20 arrangement (80% PXC; 20% EXG) as the original Empire claims.

But as I say, that’s only my understanding of the situation. You may wish to do your own background reading to satisfy yourself on this particular topic.

British_Mike continued../

on the dollar. If this did happen, it would be possibly our best outcome in the long term. Personally I would much rather see something like this happening, than the current Board of PXC trying to make a fist of it and making things worse than they already are, if that is even possible. Trust and confidence in the Board, like the share price, is at an all-time low. What’s more, Jason Riley, the CEO of EXG holds a position as Non Executive Director on the Board of PXC, and there is nothing that PXC can do about it. If ever there was a case of “fox in the henhouse” then here you have it.

I could go on, but you’re probably (sensibly) looking at other options by now. Good luck to you. Check back on us in a year or so. We’ll let you know if we’ve heard anything in the meantime.

Ha ha!! British_Mike… the ultimate head-scratcher that everyone is asking on here. Have you ever heard the saying that if an investment looks too good to be true, then it invariably is? That might well apply here.

If you are new here, IMHO, what you need to know is:

If you come with the patience of a saint, with b#lls of steel, with immovable faith in your own judgement, not in anyone else’s - least of all, the BoD’s, with the ability to lose every penny you are willing to invest here, then PXC might be for you. If you are not ticking all of those boxes, I’d give it the widest berth you possibly can. This is certainly not one for the faint of heart. There are much more investable copper miners operating in the same jurisdiction than PXC.

And if after that, your appetite is still whetted; before making your final investment decision, perhaps take a peak at the Dec 2024 RNS concerning the revamped Carry Agreement made between PXC and its 20% carried interest partner, ExGen Resources Inc. (“EXG”) and consider whether you believe that agreement gives license to EXG to hold-up PXC’s funding going forward. I believe it could well do, potentially giving EXG a ransom position. It’s only my opinion, but If this is not the reason for the lack of investment interest, then I really am at a loss, and no-one else on here has come close to providing any reasonable argument as to the reason why there is little to no interest in investment going forward.

Here are the facts regarding the investor as we know them: The Board announced back in a c.May 25 RNS that it had entered into a non-binding LOI with an American investor (identity undisclosed), purportedly well-versed in the sector. We were told that he was exiting from another investment, and that he would put time and energy into PXC contingent on the timing of his exit elsewhere. We do not know if that exit ever did conclude, or indeed whether he is still interested. We were told at an Investor’s meeting probably back in July/Aug 2025 time that the Company was in “weekly conversation” with the investor, and since then we have not heard anything, and I mean, absolutely NOTHING, from the Board as to progress, whether he is still there, what timescales we are looking at to move things forward, alternate options/interest, the reasons he is still there but not moving, the reasons he’s not still there and what Plan B looks like… absolutely ZIP.

Meanwhile, Riverfort are providing the liquidity to keep this enterprise on life support. But that comes at a price to shareholders; with every drawdown of cash, there is further dilution, as equity is released to Riverfort on every cash advancement.

As a result, the share price continues in decline. I can see sub 2p by the calendar year-end, all things remaining equal.

If EXG does have PXC held to ransom, I could see EXG potentially reversing into a mining operator, that then purchases PXC for pennies

Agreed, Trek. The article was a poor synopsis of the current situation vis a vis US and world copper fundamentals.

Isas It could be a number of reasons in PXC’s case.

Perhaps, a large block of shares might have been traded (either through an OTC arrangement or via AIM but involving American Depositary Receipts [“ADR’s”] - ADR’s are US-traded certificates that represent shares in a non-US company). These require settlement across jurisdictions, and time delays come into play which can cause complications, and therefore failed trades. Plus, bear in mind the company structure (BVI incorporation, US operations) there may be additional delays/compliance overhang in share registry update.

Possibly because the company is small with a limited trading volume, the market makers or brokers may have had to negotiate off-market or via matched bargain to avoid disturbing the normal market with a relatively large trade. So if you sell a big line of shares, the MM has to take the other side, hold the stock, and then slowly work it off. If, as is the case of PXC, where liquidity is thin, this creates wide spreads, negotiated/“off-book” trades, delayed reporting (permitted under certain conditions), partial fills followed by, you’ve guessed it… cancellations and adjustments. I’d say this is the most likely cause in what we are seeing atm with PXC.

It could be settlement issues or internal confirmation/registration delay which may have forced the trade to be cancelled or revised. It could be that the company or brokers have delayed the public disclosure because they were verifying details (especially if it involves directors/major shareholders or cross-jurisdiction steps).

At least one of these reasons will account for what is happening atm.

Hope this helps.

P26… “The valuation is absurd relative to what’s coming. A carried 25% stake in a multi-TCF onshore project with a pipeline being built — all for a £70m market cap.”

The valuation is what it is, because that is what the market was willing to pay for AEX when the Company recently went in for a further round of dilution. You can’t get any more “unabsurd” than that, actually. It’s an “all risks yield” that gets the market to that valuation; it takes into account all factors, including all 11 points that you validly make above, and all of the points that Prosciutto also validly makes, and more besides, including the increase in shares available to the market, liquidity, geopolitical risk, uncertainty of carried interest timing to market etc etc etc.

I really don’t know why there is so much vitriol on this page just because people have a different view of the outcome. The reality is that P26 and Prosciutto are just opposite sides of the same coin. We should respect that, and value that there are two highly intelligent people making very sound arguments of the risk of AEX from both sides of the coin, giving us the gift of awareness of the risks that we are in for. I appreciate that more than anything. Because the opinion that we least favour hearing is the one, in fact, that we should heed the most, on the basis that, if having considered it with an open mind, that the choice is to remain invested in Company, then I am doing so with the benefit of a full 360-degree view of the risks that come attached the investment.

Best of luck to one and all… come on AEX!!

Trek, Reuters’ author seems to be eluding to the US redefining what counts as “critical” less by scarcity but more by strategic or industrial importance in the energy transition.

But the reality is that Andy Home cites a U.S. “commercial” copper stockpile of ~731,000–831,000 t. If you benchmark that against expected energy-transition copper use in the U.S. (roughly 40–50% of total demand by the 2030s/2040s) and a U.S. total demand around 2.2 Mt/yr (2031), the energy-transition slice is ~0.88–1.10 Mt/yr. That puts today’s stockpile at 0.66–0.94 years of energy-transition demand — i.e., about 8 to 11 months. To put that into context, measured against all U.S. copper demand anticipated in 2031 (~2.2 Mt/yr) [McKinsey and Co], the stockpile is ~4–5 months of total use. That’s hardly worth the time that Andy Worth spent compiling his article. Perhaps the article is spawned more from political motivation than it is intended to be informative. It’s Reuters; they are pro WEF and they don’t like Trump.

But the fact remains that the US is a significant net importer of copper, and the Trump Administration is acutely aware of the fact that the energy transition is a 15-25 year project from here. Copper stockpiling is one element of the strategy of how the US can hedge against hockey stick copper price increases, as demand for copper from imported copper exponentially increases through the 2030’s and 2040’s.

Another element of the US strategy for copper is to look to significantly increase domestic production. The reality is that the critical minerals designation for copper is likely to make it easier for US mining firms to access federal support, accelerate project approvals, and attract funding, even though copper is not currently in short supply domestically. Maybe that’s what’s holding things up with us moving forward with funding for Empire? That would be worth waiting for, but if only our highly-esteemed Board would inform us of such. It might get a few of us on here - me included - to chirp-down a bit if we knew that was what was going on.

AIMHO

DYOR

GLA

Stuart, I mean, this pup must’ve taken some serious casualties along the way, given how long a wait it has been for anything to actually happen here.

This time of year should also be a day of remembrance for all those AEX PI’s that have perished along the way, waiting patiently, and silently hoping that something might happen… but didn’t… and to their families that have now got to make a decision as to whether they cut their miserable losses, or whether to sit, and wait patiently and silently, hoping that something might happen… Lest we forget the “Aminex Fallen”

Window dressing…

Sp28 Possibly covered warrants being exercised (again).

That was an interesting YouTube watch, thanks for sharing. New technology making the geologists’ job of identifying and mapping commercial discoveries more possible. I hope that these surveys will reveal commercial opportunities for critical mineral exploitation in North East Scotland. CAML could do with a new mining project to get its teeth into.

Solid RNS this morning. Company now debt-free having utilised FCF from sustained high margins to fully pay down company’s existing £20m debt burden: well done MPE. Keep up the great work.

Nano, the narrative isn’t building at all. It hasn’t moved. PXC remains a complete binary bet, that’s based on funding, or no funding.

Sp28…

You have seen my 3 Oct 25 post in response to Isas. You can go further back and have a look at the reason why I am still invested here and answers to your other questions, if you haven’t already.

It’s not positivity that I’m looking to quash. It’s ramping that is intended to artificially pump the sp, with nothing of any substance to back it up. London made the point a couple of days ago. BOD’s in micro caps make a living out of this kind of behaviour. I’ll continue to do whatever I can to quash artificial pumping of the sp and give the BOD’s no motivation other than to get their finger out and get a funding deal done. If yours and Multiplier’s motives were honourable, you’d be supporting what I am doing.

Multiplier was unable to answer the question that I and other long term holders are asking of PXC, which is: “why is it that PXC has placed itself at the mercy, and on the timescale of one unnamed, individual investor back in May of this year, when the jurisdiction and the technicals for the open pit are all favourable?” That is not me “constantly knocking [PXC]”. That is me constantly asking the pertinent question that we are all asking, in the absence of any meaningful information coming out of BOD’s to shareholders, which addresses the question.

So let me ask you the same question: why do you think that it is that PXC has placed itself at the mercy, and on the timescales of one unnamed, individual investor back in May of this year, when the jurisdiction and the technicals for the open pit are all favourable?

Your balanced and reasoned argument in answer to this question is most welcome.

Multiplier, thank you for your recent enthusiastic flurry of posts, which, on the one hand you’re pushing the technical benefits of PXC like your life depended on it. Then on the other hand, I and others raise a question - and a valid and pretty fundamental one at that - given PXC’s apparent solid technical fundamentals of the open pit at Empire etc, why is it that PXC has put itself, or at least finds itself, at the mercy of one single unnamed investor, and no other party; a party that might or might not perform, and that is not bound to perform … and your response is essentially: “well f**k off then, if you don’t like it!”

Thanks for that. If that is the most reasoned and balanced argument that you have, then at least it confirms that you’re as much in the dark as the rest of us.

In the 70’s, they built a ramp big enough to carry Evil Knievel over the Grand Canyon on a motorcycle. Keep on going Multiplier. You might just get him over in a juggernaut with the one that you’re building…

Roger Jolly and Prospero what you would have done with this information even if you could have read the signs as you say they happened a week before the RNS dropped? Would you have taken all of your chips off the table at 2.25p?

Multiplier, I’m really just focussed here on your 13:21 response, as it seemed to be focussed on answering the questions I put to you. The other responses were the usual ramping fluff that we can expect from you. Thank you anyway for that, but you are wasting everyone’s time on this page, as Red666 rightly states, because the only people listening are and have been up to their necks in this venture for long enough as it is. The last thing anyone needs is your sickening tripe telling us about this amazing opportunity.

So going back to 13:21 post… What then, after 6 months of further radio silence for the funding to be delivered and it still has not arrived? Will you cash-in whatever chips in PXC you have, assuming of course that you even have any at all?

The point that you make in your second 13:21 paragraph (“There are explorers who dont have any assets still drilling there 1st holes and valued at several times more.”) is precisely the point that many of us are making, which is the question WHY is it that PXC has done all the necessary drilling and assays, and proven-up the resource, in a leading jurisdiction and PXC is not only unable to secure the funding, but is valued at multiple times less than other ventures that haven’t even drilled the ground as yet???

Come on, Multiplier. Leave the sales patter at home and give us all a reasoned balanced argument as to why you believe that to be the case.

Assuming you are invested here Multiplier, what timescale are you willing to give the Board to finally get the funding sorted?

In addition, if this is such a simple slam dunk as you say it is, why do you think there is no other investment interest in PXC, other than just the one and only deal in town; an undisclosed individual that seems to be approaching this opportunity all on his own terms?

Multiplier… when you say that PXC has a small free float, why do you believe that it is small? Small in relation to what?

Fusion… I suppose it depends on what you consider to be “serious buys”. Nothing today over £5k in value. Personally, I’d say that is well short of what I would regard as “serious”. Different strokes for different folks though, I accept.

GLA.