Member Info for BritishPeculeum

It’s going to take some time for PXC to piece all of what needs to happen together, Isas. I’m not expecting anything to have happened until at least middle of October at best. In the meantime, the share price drifts lower. This still remains a binary bet, I would say. If you’re feeling lucky, a chunk of this at 2.7p may be worth a punt.

GLA.

Simms for everything to come together for PXC, Dupax and La India construction and development, concurrently, and Runruno production tailing off perhaps, what are your thoughts on what PXC will need to raise through to full production on both Dupax and La India.

Some people on here think STCM is a dog, but as the saying goes Kondratiev… “every dog has its day.”

I think that it is fair to say that STCM’s geography has played a part in its performance over recent years. I’m also long on CAML. Different sector, I accept, but has mining operations in Kazakhstan and its sp has remained relatively subdued over a similar timeframe.

Let’s hope that President Trump can broker a deal for peace between Russia and the Ukraine. Fair play to him and the US administration for at least trying.

AEX are wholly reliant upon ARA for news.

The biggest risk to shareholders of AEX, as I have said before, has to be in ARA adopting a do-nothing strategy, to see the AEX shares pull back, and for ARA to then buy up the remaining shares in AEX for buttons. Even if it means ARA doing nothing for a couple of years. In the long-run, they will make-up the difference, and some, by being in control of 100% of the shares of the operation from the outset.

AIMHO

GLA

Https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2025/08/13/3132379/0/en/ExGen-Resources-and-MTB-Metals-Enter-into-Non-Binding-Letter-of-Intent-to-Merge-Creating-a-Copper-Gold-and-Lithium-Exploration-and-Development-Company.html

Trek Madone

I just want to pick up on one issue, and it’s a fundamental one, which is that PXC do not own 100% of Empire. They own 80%, with the remaining 20%, owned by ExGen Resources, on a fully-carried basis.

The 2015 agreement between PXC and ExGen IMHO is a pig in a poke, which makes PXC as it currently stands unfundable, and is probably what led to the breakdown in the first attempt at bond financing with NIU.

In a nutshell, what needs to be done at the outset prior to funding being completed is for ExGen to be taken out, probably by way of the issuance of shares, and a royalty licence, and then for the newly-acquired shares to be consolidated into PXC. This would make the venture much more appealing from a funding perspective.

There is some heavy lifting to do to get all of this done in the right order and on the right terms. First, getting ExGen on board with an exit on terms that work for them, then back-to-backing an acceptable deal with the mystery investor, to fund the corporate deal between ExGen and PXC that leaves more than crumbs on the table for existing shareholders of PXC to approve the deal at an EGM.

It’s going to be a sobering offer by the time all of that has been set in motion I dare say. But the one thing I would wholeheartedly agree with you on is that given the scale and potential of this asset it’s better to take 10% of something than 80% of absolutely nothing.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Incidentally, ExGen yesterday entered into a non-binding letter of intent to merge with a third party mining exploration company MTB Metals Corp. Both ExGen and MTB have shared interests in land in British Columbia’s “Golden Triangle” region, so an exit deal

with PXC at Empire may give ExGen the funds that it needs to focus on exploitation of its Dok asset in conjunction with MTB’s adjacent Telegraph asset in BC.

All IMHO…

GLA.

Isas I think I read somewhere that the LOI was non-binding, that is, that neither party is legally bound to anything at this stage, so in this case it seems there is most probably no time constraint, unless one was agreed between the parties and included in the LOI.

Major4legs…

The G7 banks doesn’t include the European Central Bank.

Since 1999, the European Central Bank has been steadily building its monetary gold reserves. In 2024, it significantly increased its monetary gold reserves. The reserves rose to nearly 41 billion euros, up from just over 30 billion euros in 2023. This marked the largest increase in gold reserves in the period since 1999.

By the laws of supply and demand, that has to have an impact on the POG. The reason for ECB’s (or any central banks’) build of gold is almost irrelevant, if what we are talking about are the factors that affect the POG. Everything else is opinion and speculation, is it not?

Major4legs…

“However with the notable exception of China the G7 banks have not increased gold reserves.”

When you say the G7 banks, are you talking central banks?

Do you have any data and a source to back that statement up, please?

Thank you.

Major4legs… the continued accumulation of gold by Central Banks around the world… surely this is a major [4-legged] contributor to the POG, is it not? The laws of supply and demand in action? No conspiracy theory about that, surely?

Timmomo I’m referencing the RNS document that you kindly provided the link to that states:

“Further details of this shareholder loan, including quantum and key terms, will be announced once agreed between the parties AND FUNDING [emphasis added] has been finalised by Pheonix .”

That’s the facts that PXC has provided. I’ve been through the RNS schedule since this document was published and could not see any amendment or addition to this to materially change the position. In fact at yesterday’s Investor’s Presentation, Management confirmed that this is consistent with the strategic approach that PXC is taking wrt ExGen.

Timmomo in fact, I’d go one stage further than that, and it actually gets a whole lot worse, in that what that document actually confirms is that there is an obligation upon PXC to obtain funding for the project BEFORE ExGen even has to come to the table to agree anything, if indeed, ExGen has any obligation to come to the table to agree anything at all.

As I see it, ExGen basically has PXC ransomed. I presume that is why NIU went away when they realised this. Will “the Investor” realise the full consequences of this when he does his due diligence??? If he is as savvy as one would expect, a meet with ExGen would be a necessity, to allow his professionals to run the ruler over the relationship between PXC and ExGen.

Last chance saloon for PXC. Failure here, next stop insolvency, IMHO

Timmonomo… thanks for sending this document link.

“Further details of this shareholder loan, including quantum and key terms, will be announced once agreed between the parties and funding has been finalised by Phoenix.”

What this actually was. was nothing more than an agreement to agree. In other words, ExGen are in no way bound to anything at this stage without agreeing to , well, pretty much everything. According to this document, ExGen are not obliged to agree anything.

Now we are getting to the heart of what the issue is here. Until we have a binding agreement upon ExGen that is a commitment to specifics, what you have is a project that is not fundable.

It’s as simple as that, as I see it.

From the Investor Presentation, I learned:

1. “the Investor” is committed to another project atm and won’t engage with entering into a binding agreement with PXC unless or until he has exited that project. The project that he is currently engaged was apparently the subject of recent media attention. Whether that means that his exit is expected soon was by no means clear. The Investor has not been to site to undertake a visit. But he does however have experience in projects similar to PXC.

2. Permitting has not been sought for the operation and won’t be sought until funding is in place.

3. Negotiations are ongoing with Riverfort to renew facility that expires at the end of August 2025, but nothing has yet been agreed between Riverfort and PXC.

4. PXC own 80% of the interest in Empire but fully expect that PXC will have to pick up 100% of the capital cost to deliver the project, “and to sort out the difference later [with the 20% stakeholder] ”

Thatshowitis…

“Keeping the faith and the power of positivity” cuts it when what you have is some level of goodwill between management and investors left on the table.

No RNS this morning. Looking like you’re probably on the money Isas.

Risky business in my view calling an Investor’s Presentation at such short notice, knowing at that point “the Investor” still had not completed kicking the tyres, and committing to the project. Seems very odd to me, the whole thing.

Karposh what’s another month anyway?

I think we are going to see some dilution incoming, and news that “the Investor” has gone away.

GLA.

True, Isas. It’s looking like he might well have concluded his “site inspection” and decided… “nah!” … Or at least not at 5p.

If that is the case, that surely has to be confirmed in an RNS.

Isas I would say that the investor is a very astute guy, making a deal “subject to site inspection”. In other words, in a time that is suited to his choosing, and not necessarily that of PXC. I presume (more, hope) there will be a backstop date to completion. His savvy is hopefully something that PXC can benefit from, and something the company desperately needs.

Meantime, the copper market is in a state of flux, in response to President Trump’s exclusion of copper ores and concentrates from tariffs. I think it is fair to say Copper miners in the US were going to be fetching a premium valuation because of their favourable location in relation to the US market. Now that is not the case, it levels the playing field for US copper miners in terms of investment and acquisition terms.

CAML recently had a near miss, having got sucked into a bidding war for New World Resources which has cu mining interests in the US. They missed out, but in the context of yesterday’s news, at the premium that NWC sold for last week (a 235% premium on the sp prior to offer) I’ll bet they are glad they did.

I still maintain that an existing operator like CAML, with its copper mining experience would be a good option to take this project forward, especially given yesterday’s news from the White House. Whether this investor can see this as a possibility and be in a position to broker a deal with an existing operator remains to be seen.