Member Info for Catbert

I'm not worried about the price although I do wish I was clever enough to trade profitably.

My guess is that the market thinks it knows what it needs to know about the Pitfield project and wants to bank a little profit. Fair enough. My own view is that there is still a lot of exciting news to come.

I'm happy to sit it out and wait. For several reasons;

1. Possibility of copper finds in remaining drill results at Pitfield.

2. Possibility of signing a JV MOU at Pitfield. A JV is too soon but an MOU towards this end is a possibility.

3. Aussie government involvement possibility of grant funding?

4. Stavely potential.

5. Pending Geochem for Pitfield- this unlocks processing pathway(s) and may also signal the presence of other metals.

For me the big tell is the fact that they cut and pasted that Titanium column on their diamond drill results and didn't re-post the findings of even one other element at all. Hmm. Other statements to the effect of saying that they know where the copper is seem significant too.

Secondly, given that they know where the copper is at Pitfield they are going after Staveley. All while they have this massive project at Pitfield? This says something about what they must think they have at Stavely see below;

"The project licence area sits along strike from the recent greenfield discoveries made by Stavely Minerals at the Thursday Gossan Project, including their discovery hole SMD050, drilled in September 2019, at the structurally controlled Cayley lode which intersected 32m @ 5.88% Cu, 1.0g/t Au, 58g/t Ag. Stavely Minerals have since reported an Inferred Resource of 28Mt @ 0.4% Cu for 110kt contained Cu defined in a shallow supergene chalcocite blanket, confirming the high potential for significant copper-gold mineralisation within the broader Stavely Arc region.

The area is highly prospective for a range of arc-related mineral systems, such as porphyry, epithermal, and volcanic-hosted massive sulphide systems. Only 2% outcrop (including Thursdays Gossan) whilst the remainder lies under shallow Murray Basin cover and is essentially unexplored."

Someone once asked Napoleon what quality he most valued in his Generals- that they are "lucky" was his reply. He'd have given SB a job for sure.

Stavely seems to be a strange one but then again 32 m at 5.88 % copper. Hello.

GLA DYOR and Merry Christmas.

Fair play to Harry. He doesn't have to do these interviews and if he wanted to he could easily disappear and keep us in the dark. Many other Directors of mining explorers and developers do just this.

Instead he's communicating with share holders and that is the right thing to do.

This deal is incredibly complex and it is political as much as it is economic. Ethiopia has a complex and difficult history of late and a Development Bank has to navigate the political landscape as it is. They only get one chance to get this right.

In the grand scheme some delay is to be expected. It isn't as some posters here would have it evidence of Harry's Malfeasance.

Harry does not control all of the parts of this equation. Some, like the EG and the Development banks have their own agendas- this fact seems to be continuously overlooked by some of our most relentless posters whose sole motive seems to be to malign Harry.

Harry is doing the right things for me. I trust him. If he's wrong I'll lose money but that's on me not him.

If he's right and I think he is then I'll be ready to thank him if I ever meet him.

GLA DYOR

Update

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2kjz_ss1aQ

A point which is understandably overlooked here (as this is a Kefi investors board) is that the Bank's decision were it to be positive and we hope it is will be a major boost for Ethiopia and it's government in particular.

TK is a major asset which has the scope to generate $ for the Ethiopians.

The beneficiaries of bank sign off therefore are not solely Kefi holders but the EG and Ethiopian people.

Large scale foreign earnings particularly enterprises where payment is made in USD are particularly important to Ethiopia.

The expenditure on infrastructure and the jobs created will add something in their own rights but the real pay off is the large dollar earning capacity of a project of this size.

What happens to shareholders when a company on the AIM exchange appoints administrators?

This from ChatGPT;

When a company listed on the AIM (Alternative Investment Market) appoints administrators, the situation can have various implications for shareholders. Here are some potential outcomes:

Suspension of Trading: The AIM may suspend trading of the company's shares upon the appointment of administrators. This can result in shareholders being unable to buy or sell their shares until further notice.

Potential Losses: Shareholders may face potential losses, as the value of their shares could decline significantly following the appointment of administrators. In some cases, the shares may become worthless if the company goes into liquidation.

Influence on Decision Making: Shareholders may have limited influence on the decision-making process during the administration period, as the administrators take control of the company's operations and have the authority to make key decisions regarding the restructuring or sale of the business.

Potential for Recovery: Depending on the outcome of the administration process, shareholders may have the opportunity to recover some of their investment if the company is successfully restructured or if there is a sale of the business that yields returns to the shareholders.

GLA DYOR

Besides our holdings in Labrador, we have two green metals projects with a combined NAV in excess of £1 bn all for a market cap of a piddling £7.35m.

The market would seem to be saying that neither Grangesberg nor Parys Mountain has a hope in hell's chance of becoming a mine and yet the project economics of both are now compelling and the need for green metals is front and centre as a global political issue and a major talking point at Cop28.

Parys mountain has been a long slog as has Grangeberg but the world is now a vastly different place to what it was when these two sites were closed as mines.

The market price reflects years of false starts and delays it reflects a history of investor disappointment. It reflects a world which was looking backwards to the past.

I believe that we are now due to enter an era with a different way of thinking, one which is forwards looking. In a world like this the assets of Parys Mountain and Grangesberg are stunningly undervalued and will be desperately needed.

£7.35m for NAV > $1Bn. This must be the bargain of the century. Even if Aym were simply valued on a low % of NAV say 5% we'd be worth 5 times what we are now and that is without opening a mine on either of our assets.

The value here is off the scale. IMHO both projects are feasible.

GLA DYOR.

Grangex expect to be pumping at Dannemora by Christmas and they have also just bought Norway's 3.5mt pa Iron ore mine, Sydvaranger, another brown field project for $33m US paying $20m up front and $12m on build.

Dannemora is now fully permitted and project level finance is due to complete within the quarter.

Interestingly the fee paid for Sydvaranger was for a project with a NAV of $550m which would seem to indicate that with nothing done to the project our own Grangesberg project NAV $688 should be worth more.

A value of over $40m pro rata is the open market price for Grangesberg based on the sale of Sydvaranger!

It is not difficult to see then how undervalued Anglesey has become.

It is also clear that the Swedes have established some precedents which might favour the permitting at Grangesberg given that Dannemora looks to be proceeding.

Good post Marcus.

With MOU's to be signed next year presumably they have already held the in principle type discussions.

This appointment further telegraphs their next moves and as Marcus points out it was always a part of their plan.

Plus Knauth looks like the real deal for a project of this size.

I doubt they would have got him if the finance piece wasn't more or less in the bag. Great news for shareholders here.

"Earwig go" said the earwig as he slid down the bannister.

They have plenty of space to build and $1bn to develop a tier 1 deposit is chump change.

They have port facilities and lots of sunlight for power generation.

Https://www.angleseymining.co.uk/2021-preliminary-economic-assessment/

PEA not PFS you are correct.

Great find Hawaii!

The current PFS for Parys grossly underestimates the economic case for the project (or so it seems). The work done has expanded the resource, improved certainty and developed some new high quality zones with very obvious high grade copper over 10m (still awaiting assays) the strike of the discovered zone is at least 1k. Our old PFS is also using old prices too.

My guess is that we are moving towards an updated and final revision of our PFS and towards the DFS stage and financing for Parys. Some elements of these last two stages may be done in parallel.

The project economics are moving in a positive direction and we are looking very undervalued on a %of NAV basis.

GLA DYOR.

This from ChatGPT;

There are several reasons why an option holder may choose to exercise their share options:

Profit Opportunity: If the current market price of the underlying stock is higher than the strike price of the options, the option holder may exercise their options to purchase the stock at the lower strike and then sell it at the higher market price, thereby realizing a profit.

Investment Decision: The option holder may believe in the long-term potential of the underlying company and may choose to exercise their options to shares for investment purposes.

Tax Considerations: Exercising options can have tax implications, and option holders may choose to exercise their options to manage their tax liabilities especially if there is a favorable tax treatment for holding shares acquired through option exercise.

Diversification: If the option holder's investment portfolio is significantly weighted towards their company's stock due to holding a substantial amount of options, exercising some options can help diversify their investment holdings.

Company Events: Corporate events such as mergers, acquisitions, or changes in control can trigger accelerated vesting of options, leading option holders to exercise their options under certain circumstances.

I quite like that last one. Given that this point has been discussed with SB at interviews it's certainly within the range of possibilities. I know it is still wildly speculative of me to suggest it but hey what the heck let's have a bit of fun with the idea. You never know.....

GLA DYOR

We are indeed operating at the level of theoreticals until such time as a method is proven for extracting titanium from our soft rock targets. Proof of concept will be a major catalyst for value here.

I'd imagine that most holders are well aware of this issue. Furthermore the Board and SB in particular must be acutely aware of this.

My own view for what it's worth is that if SB was of the view that economic processing was an impediment or even a serious risk then we would have already seen a pivot back to exploration for copper. We have not.

SB and his circle have a deep understanding of processing Titanum.

I wouldn't expect him to make anything beyond a statement about theoretical possibilities about a processing pathway until such time as a bulk processing run has been successfully completed.

An emphatic statement in the scientific would requires emphatic proof.

Nonetheless we can answer the question about what the best scientists who have expertise in processing Titanium believe.

Based on our continued targeting of the Titanium resource the consensus appears to be that they believe that they can extract the Titanium in an economic way.

The evidence is based on what they are doing.

The titanium was deposited out of a solution therefore it is soluable if it is soluable it can be separated from where it is now. All theoretical of course, at least until such time as a successful bulk processing trial proves it beyond any doubt whatsoever.

GLA DYOR

SB is a metallurgist by training. He isn't likely to make proclamations relating to his subject which are unfeasible unless our new troll is of the view that SB is a pure charlatan. Given SB's long and successful career it doesn't seem likely at all.

SB further adds that the Titanium was precipitated out of the hydrothermal fluids into the sandstone and thus a reverse of this process is theoretically possible.

One further point. This is sandstone so milling it to a sand-like consistency is pretty straight forwards.

Most boards have one or two who take a deeply negative line and often veer into abusing commentary.

I don't mind the former as a skeptical view point at least adds something to the discussions the abuse however seems unnecessary.

This latter element is rarely if ever well informed and speaks more about the poster than it ever does about the subject of the abuse.

Some of this might be simpler than we think. Perhaps the Saudi's do have aspirations to break into the EV market. In the shorter term however they have a policy called Afrabia which is based on their goal to increase trade with African from it's current $10bn levels. In many parts of Africa the transmission cables are regularly stolen- solar is an obvious and large scale market and a development asset.

Africa has a young and growing population, within 30 years it has the capability for transformational growth. The Saudi's are capable business people with a visionary approach to economic development. I think they might do better with AMTE than we ever could. They must be incredulous at the stupidity and lack of vision of the British political classes.

Good luck to them.

The registrant of Domain Name: pinnacle.sa translates as "The First Summit Investment Company".

It looks like the $65000 figure is busted I found it somewhere on the internet this morning. Somewhere ranged between $10,000- $20,000 seems more appropriate.

Cut my resource value now to $18 Trillion US.

Sorry to tiddle on your strawberries.

Just a correction of my outlandish figure $120 Trillion US is a value of the resource and not a NAV as a NAV would be based on both the resource number and the project economics and then discounted over time.

Nonetheless the Nav would still likely be several Trilion US just based on the likely scale of the project.

The mean value for a mining project pre mine is usually 27% of NAV.

Thus if my figures are anywhere near correct the value here is several billion US$ at least.

This number is by no means de-risked and we still need way more info on processing pathways and costs etc.

So please DYOR and GLA.

$65,000 per ton