Member Info for Catbert

On a more positive note (whilst we still haven't had an update on the outstanding news items). What has been happening is that Marty exercised his option on 1.5m shares and he had already bought a stack.

Gagan Gupta has apparently also filled his boots with a shed load of shares and on top of that we've had a series of quite beefy looking buys (I assume they are buys) being sneaked through and these are transactions many times larger than the average here.

I'm wondering if the market makers have instructions to hold the price back as these transactions don't seem to have moved the price which seems to defy the usual laws of supply and demand.

So presumably the posh end of town is up to something. Quite what it all means I don't know. The Nomads haven't answered any of MMs questions either so maybe we are about to find out.

Elphick is bound not to sell any of his holding until September according to the deal with Greymont which makes me think that we must be close to some sort of inflection point. Hopefully it is a positive one for holders here and not just for the insiders.

What do others think?

Hi Extrader. Agree. Resource nationalism in both Guinea and Gabon where both now have Military leaderships is problematic for miners as these countries are pushing stronger demands for more in country processing and changing the rules constantly which makes costing projects difficult and drives up the capex requirements in an unplannable way.

This makes investing more difficult. CB by contrast has a more moderate approach, a more settled environment and seems to be a better bet for inward investment. Guinea's actions will impact the UAE who also have a non state related investment in Fortesque's Gabon project (Belinga).

If the Guineans and Gabonese wish to piddle in their own swimming pool by embracing thier emerging tendencies towards resource nationalism. We should welcome it. The Kola project finance (non binding terms) has a requirement that insurance against expropriation is taken out (again middle eastern finance and Chinese engineering) .

Expropriation remains an ever present risk but not an insurmountable one.

I would calculate that projects in CB have a better chance of being brought to fruition relative to other nearby jurisdictions. The Geology is great in all three countries but there is political risk and putting all your eggs into one basket seems risky.

BTW "sandbagging" is when sales people know they have a pending order but delay declaring it becasue they have hit a prior period's target and wish to move the sale to future reporting period it also applies to finance where they move the reporting time period for declaring a cost. It is basically gaming the timing of results. In this case I refer to timing of news items.

they're rather telegraphing the insider ****housery now aren't they?

presumably sandbagging the news. time for an rns.

In a scientific conference setting, a "poster" refers to a large, visually organized display that summarizes a researcher’s study, findings, and conclusions using a combination of concise text, figures, tables, and images. Posters are typically presented during dedicated "poster sessions," where the researcher stands by their poster to discuss their work and answer questions from conference attendees.

The purpose of a poster is to communicate the essentials of a research project to peers in a clear, accessible way, stimulating discussion and feedback. Posters usually contain sections such as title, authors, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and conclusions, with an emphasis on graphics rather than long blocks of text. The researcher presents their work informally and interacts with interested viewers, making the poster session a valuable opportunity for networking and knowledge exchange in the scientific community.

Posters will be presented for Fusion at both the August 2025: Immuno-Oncology Summit US (scientific posters)

San Diego, December 2025: Antibody Engineering & Therapeutics Conference (major presentation and commercial launch of OptiMAL®) Both Dr Mitchell Ho and Dr Richard Buick will be presenting at this event.

What might a step change look like? Besides the technical analysis dimension the most imminent news item is the completion of the validation process of Dr Mitchell Ho's work signaled, via investor communications and share chat channels, that the collaboration and validation work is “coming to a close soon” and the core validation stage is “very close to having full completion”.

The significance of this is not to be underestimated because based on progress to date, it is highly likely that Dr. Mitchell Ho will reference or credit Fusion Antibodies (FAB) in future publications or presentations, for several reasons:

Active and Ongoing Scientific Collaboration: Dr. Ho and the NCI have been using Fusion’s OptiMAL® platform and other antibody discovery technologies in recent research, with public updates noting scientific milestones achieved through this partnership. Ongoing shipments of antibody-expressing cells, positive validation results, and continued engagement between Dr. Ho’s group and Fusion suggest the collaboration is producing novel research outputs.

Scientific Best Practice and Precedents: In academic and translational research, it is standard practice to credit external technology providers, collaborators, or platforms that make significant contributions to research findings. Since the OptiMAL® platform and related FAB technologies are being used in antibody generation and characterization, references are expected in resulting peer-reviewed articles, conference presentations, and posters.

Benefit to Both Parties: Referencing the use of Fusion’s technology in high-profile NCI research benefits both Dr. Ho (by lending credibility and traceability to the research pipeline) and Fusion Antibodies (by helping to demonstrate the real-world value of their platform, which is important for further adoption and commercial success).

Precedent in Similar Collaborations: Previous collaborations involving external antibody discovery and engineering platforms—especially where the technology is proprietary—are almost always disclosed in publications’ materials and methods, acknowledgments, or author contributions.

While the specific content and frequency of references will depend on the outcomes of ongoing experiments and manuscript development timelines, the expectation is that Fusion Antibodies will be credited and referenced in forthcoming scientific outputs from Dr. Ho's group, particularly where their technologies have been pivotal.

Https://informaconnect.com/antibody-engineering-therapeutics/speakers/richard-buick-phd/

Have a look at the people that Richard Buick is presenting to.

The conference next week may be significant depending on the NCI presentation as there will be both trade press and specialist investors present.

The content of the presentation will be potentially important particularly if it references FAB.

Furthermore the current License for NCI expires in November and so it must be close to a renewal discussion.

Possibly an announcement could be sooner rather than later as the NCI budget year ends 30th September.

If it has worked well then an announcement of this renewal on commercial terms would be a powerful news item in both in revenue terms and as a market signal of the efficacy of the FAB offering.

The next year is going to be very exciting.

Indeed every client win will be a news item in addition we should expect more trade press visibility and the expansion of geographical patent cover will add to the appeal.

They've cut the spread to drop the price. The tarts. Someone wants your shares. Not even clever. Amusing ....but not clever.

Chat GPT does not distinguish on the validity of it's reference points which means that it even uses site like this and posters on here as reference material.

Think Google search in the old days when people bought backlinks from link farms to get their website to the top of Google Search even though their site and company was garbage this is what LLM do now. They are eminently gameable at this point in their evolution.

.......plenty of interesting conversations.

Fusion Antibodies (FAB) offers technologies and services that are highly relevant to the subject of “Improving the Therapeutic Window of ADCs (Antibody-Drug Conjugates) through Multi-Step Engineering.” which will be the subject of the NCI spokesperson's presentation.

Here is how:

ADC Multi-Step Engineering Goal Relevance of FAB Offering

Human/engineered antibody production Direct capability: discovery to production

Antibody developability & stability screening Integrated into FAB’s R&D pipeline

Formats for improved payload delivery (e.g., Fab) Provided by FAB as standard service

Custom engineering for site-specific conjugation Supported by their advanced technologies

Workflow for iterative engineering/optimization Core benefit of FAB platform

In conclusion Fusion Antibodies (FAB) is well-positioned to support efforts in improving the therapeutic window of ADCs through multi-step antibody engineering, by providing the essential engineered antibody scaffolds and molecular techniques used for state-of-the-art conjugation, developability, and antibody–payload pairing in modern ADC research and development.

At the Immuno-Oncology Summit US 2025, Fusion Antibodies will also be active in several marketing activities centered around showcasing their core technologies and engaging with the industry:

Poster Presentations: Fusion Antibodies will present posters on their OptiMAL™ mammalian display platform, which enables the discovery of novel antibodies using their proprietary human naïve antibody library. They will also feature their Ab-ility™ In-silico Developability platform, offering advanced sequence analysis, 3D modeling, liability engineering, and rapid sequence screening for antibody lead selection.

Networking and Client Engagement: Representatives will attend the event with the intention of connecting with existing and potential clients. Fusion Antibodies is encouraging attendees to schedule meetings to discuss their capabilities and learn how they can help take collaborative projects to the next stage.

Brand Positioning and Thought Leadership: The company positions itself as an end-to-end antibody discovery partner and aims to reinforce its expertise in antibody generation, development, production, characterization, and optimization throughout the summit. Their participation is aimed at increasing brand visibility among preclinical and clinical innovators in the immuno-oncology space.

Industry Dialogue: Fusion Antibodies’ team will participate in networking sessions throughout the event to foster new relationships and keep abreast of the latest industry advances in bi/multispecific antibodies, ADCs, cell therapies, organoid modeling, data science, and machine learning.

This event is expected to be hot on the heels of a recent Patent grant. Hopefully there will

If Fusion’s patents are granted and their platforms are widely validated and adopted (especially by strategic clients or in late-stage therapeutics), they become an extremely attractive target.

Typical Valuation Multiples (2025 BioPharma M&A)

Recent biotech and specialized technology-driven service providers in 2025 are being acquired at enterprise value (EV)/revenue multiples in the range of 5.5x to 7x annual revenues for high-growth, proprietary platform companies—especially those with strong IP, advanced automation, and clear market traction.

Fusion’s Potential Revenue at Scale

With industry benchmarks and company projections, Fusion could realistically achieve annual revenues between $50 million and $100 million within 3–5 years of successful patent grants, robust commercialization, and premium positioning.

Takeover Valuation Range

Using current market multiples:

At $50 million revenue × 5.5–7x: $275 million–$350 million

At $100 million revenue × 5.5–7x: $550 million–$700 million

So, a realistic range for Fusion in a takeover scenario is approximately $275 million to $700 million, depending on the exact revenue run-rate, IP strength, growth outlook, and competitive tension among buyers.

Premiums and Upside

Top-tier, highly competitive deals (with strategic exclusivity or breakthrough potential) sometimes see premiums above these multiples, particularly if a buyer wishes to deny rivals access to transformational technology or capture a potential market leader.

In summary:

If Fusion Antibodies successfully patents and commercializes its tech platforms, and scales revenue to $50–100 million, an acquisition value in the range of $275 million to $700 million is both realistic and supported by recent pharma and biotech market trends. This outcome reflects both the strategic value of the technology and the current appetite for tech-enabled, IP-rich platforms among large pharmaceutical acquirers.

Fair Value Assessment

By most industry yardsticks, Fusion is not overvalued relative to its revenue run-rate and IP portfolio, although it is not “cheap” on traditional earnings metrics due to ongoing losses.

The market is pricing in:

Present risk (small size, narrow customer base, negative earnings).

Considerable future optionality (patent-protected growth, automation platform licensing, possible acquisition interest).

Should the company succeed in scaling post-patent, its valuation could rise markedly based on revenue multiples typical for platform-enabled bio-services and IP monetization companies.

In summary:

Fusion Antibodies’ current valuation appears broadly fair given its latest revenue growth, the strategic pivot underway, and clear pathway to future IP-driven value. Investors are paying for future growth optionality as much as for today’s cashflow, and the price reflects both upside potential and near-term execution/commercialization risk.

DYOR.GLA

Agree with Driving. Similar is being attempted at Kore Potash. Chinese Engineering with Middle Eastern Finance - it may be time to read up on the latter subject (Sharia Compliant Finance). In short it suits an off take funding model well. Our project is different and could be a mixture of loan finance and something along the lines of what is being worked on for the Kola project.

Recently, major African finance spokespeople have made strong statements about the need for innovative financing products to meet the continent’s development and sustainability goals. Notably, Claver Gatete, Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), stressed the importance of “innovative financing mechanisms, coupled with reforms in the global financial architecture,” as essential to unlocking new avenues for sustainable investment and inclusive growth across Africa.

Gatete emphasized leveraging Africa’s natural resources and using innovative finance to drive progress in key sectors, including food systems, energy, digital connectivity, and climate action.

Gatete’s call was echoed during the 10th Africa Regional Forum on Sustainable Development, where African and international leaders highlighted the continent's urgent need for new financing instruments to address debt challenges and fund sustainable development.

Additionally, the President and CEO of the Africa Finance Corporation (AFC), Samaila Zubairu, regularly advocates for the development and deployment of de-risked, transformational projects through innovative financing strategies—combining public and private capital, and creating new financial instruments to solve infrastructure and energy bottlenecks on the continent.

The consensus among Africa’s most influential finance leaders is clear: to address funding gaps, African countries urgently need more creative, tailored, and sustainable financing products.

Hmm? Derisked transformational projects leveraging Africa's natural resources with sustainability/ climate action credentials .

I wonder if we know about one of those? Curious how this circles back to the AFC again. It's a small world isn't it?

GLA

Extrader I'm struggling to find data on this to answer your question -the best I can find is the following :

As of July 2025, the prevailing spot price for 67% Fe DR-grade pellet feed is about $117/dmt CFR Middle East, with contract premiums for DR-grade pellet feed still around $48/dmt above the relevant fines index for similar grade material.

My reference points are https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/PlattsContent/_assets/_files/en/our-methodology/methodology-specifications/global_iron_ore.pdf

and

https://www.fastmarkets.com/insights/what-vales-latest-q4-pellet-premiums-tell-us-about-the-steelmaking-sector-in-2024/

The latter reference is a little out of date however. But if I were to hazard a guess at least $165 per tonne and I guess this is net of shipping costs.

In terms of shipping costs these are about the same and charged on a per tonne basis. Pellet is easier to ship and load and less likely to move about in transit. You also need less weight of it to make a tonne of steel that iron ore however I'm not clear is that is already factored into the prices or not.

So in summary my best guesstimate is $165 a tonne however there is a cost of pelletisation to factor in and there is nothing that I can find which says that holders here will own the pelletisation plant. "All that glisters is not gold" and so on.

Nonetheless our project as a supplier of the raw material piped to PN looks like it should wash it's own face and some with these sorts of numbers.

Fastmarkets (active as of July 18, 2025) and industry sources suggest the spot price for 67.5% Fe magnetite-hematite pellet feed, CFR Qingdao, is in the range of $119-120 per tonne.

The Zanaga project has almost industry leading production costs.

Early years of production (Stage One): Costs around $28 per dmt FOB, due to higher feed grades and better recoveries.

Stage Two efficiencies: Costs drop further due to scale, with some analyst coverage rounding the expansion cost to about $25 per tonne for the higher-grade 68.5% Fe product.

What is that worth?

I've not long invested and was curious to learn from long term holders what they think the end game might be here.

From what I understand the technology allows faster drug research and the platform is a quantum leap ahead of any other similar option in terms of scope.

My possibly erroneous conclusion is that if it is so good surely one end point is that a single large Pharma takes this out as if would create a quite clear strategic advantage both as a cost saving approach for themselves, but also as a denial of such to their competitors.

A price to achieve an end point along these lines might easily be significant multiples of the current market cap. Is this feasible? What have I missed?

Big Pharma regulalry take out a smaller development scale Pharma with good IP for several hundred million without batting an eyelid and in this case they know the likley sales and can easily model the cost benefit.

Here the cost benefit would be in cost savings and time to market - again easy to model but perhaps any model would be less precise than a purchase of a single small pharma with a interesting product.

Nonetheless saving cost is akin to adding profit and so the benefits might be almost immediate.

Is there a business case for a sale of the whole kit and caboodle to the first big pharma brave enough to stick their neck out.

If so what's the value of this business?

They are buying it already from Iran.

Several of Iran’s iron ore mines are capable of producing ore suitable for DRI (Direct Reduced Iron) production. If they ever get fully integrated back into the global system they could even be customers for Zanaga off take.

Indeed Iran is recognized as one of the world’s leading DRI producers, relying mainly on natural gas-based processes such as MIDREX and PERED, which require high-quality iron ore—specifically, iron ore concentrates and pellets with appropriate chemical composition and physical properties for direct reduction.

Key points confirming Iran's capability:

Production Scale: Iran produced 33.4 million tons of DRI in 2023, with all DRI sourced from natural gas-based processes. This demonstrates that domestic mines supply ore of sufficiently high grade for these processes.

Raw Material Standards: Iranian iron ore producers comply with standards set by the Institute of Standards and Industrial Research of Iran (ISIRI) to ensure product quality, supporting the requirements for DRI-standard feedstock. DRI production typically demands iron ore with high Fe content (usually 67%+ for pellets) and low levels of deleterious elements such as sulfur and phosphorus.

Pelletizing Facilities: Major mining operations, such as Gol Gohar and Sangan, have dedicated pelletizing plants and have invested in increasing pellet production that is tailored for DRI processes.

Downstream Integration: Several steel companies (e.g., Mobarekeh Steel Company, Iranian Ghadir Iron and Steel Co.) operate integrated routes that convert domestic concentrate and pellets to DRI at world-scale volumes and metallization degrees suitable for electric arc furnace (EAF) steelmaking.

These folks can enrich Uranium so they can certainly accomplish the technical challenges required to produce DRI quality products.

I suspect that the scale at which they are doing this is under-reported and that in fact they are probably far ahead of many others aspiring to be in this space.

They are the 6th largest Iron Ore producer globally, they have both significant Iron Ore reserves and plenty of hydro carbons to process it.

In addition to this they have a very highly educated workforce with a significant base of technical expertise. They have an estimated 5 billion metric tons of Iron Ore reserves.

I'm sure that having been sanctioned for some time has driven them to innovate and invest in this area.

In a number of ways they area already quite a bit more advanced than the Aussies. Maybe they have had to be.

Right now they are literally eating the Aussie's breakfast even though the Aussie Iron ore reserves are in excess of 10 times those of Iran.

In reality one family had to move in stage 1 so that they could build the camp (our money paid for it). So the news is that they have finaly paid these folks.

A little bit slow, but I suppose it's something.

Let's not imagine that any other people are being resettled yet because that won't happen until the finance is signed off by the full consortium.

I'm not entirely clear what is provoking the "When Harry met Sally " headline here but I am all for MM's enthusiasm!

The new lad needs to get a handle on Kennacott and Simandou.

The latter of which is a complicated and polictically fragile situation.

The Guinean regime should at some point transition to a democratic civilian one but uncertain politics is baked in. The railway is a huge project which is massively behind schedule. The Chinese partners are a big asset however even so the project is riven with complexity and the Guinean government seems predisposed to taking the harshest line they can concieve on almost all matters. Perhaps their view is that the whole country might be in need of a soldier's level of discipline. This may be true but somehow the balance of power needs to be a little more balanced for the project to thrive.

One way a more balanced political landscape could be constructed for Simandou is if Rio bought and developed Zanaga. If they did that it might allow them some more leverage with the Guinean politcal elite.

This is because if Rio executed the Zanaga project faster than Simandou it would surely show the Guineans that it is they and not Rio who are the fly in the ointment. Plus it gives Rio a slow down or walk away threat because they can produce much of what was planned via Simandou through CB and probably at a lower cost too.

This might cause the Guineans to be less inclined to overplay their hand. Plus if Rio ended up with both Simandou and Zanaga wouldn't they just be the absoulte cats pajamas in the world of Iron ore? Yes, yes, yes!

Where would this leave their competition at BHP and Fortesque? Well Fortesque has Belinga which has similar challenges to the Simandou project and BHP think they are going to beneficiate their way out of the Pilbara rust problem.

This aside the Aussies are not the only game in town.

The Americans may have an interest, the Italian's may also be interested and so too the Japanese and the middle east has the capability to take advantage of an opportunity like this too.

Maybe we are in the calm before the storm. News on the outstanding items can't come soon enough IMHO.

I don't know about Rio. Maybe.

If this project is worked to the point that it presents as one of the largest, highest quality, lowest cost Iron ore projects on the planet it becomes the hill that you have got to take in order to dominate the Iron Ore space. It also becomes the hill which you must also prevent your rivals from taking too.

For this reason I don't rule out Rio. Although it might be a long shot.