Member Info for CHRI5P

I am actually OK with GLR having one license in the NW of Zambia. We already have a huge pipeline of projects to prove up and release value from.

Cyber you gave a balanced view of AFP. I should have made the point that FQ/AFP do have twice the area of XTR and their initial research is very positive.

ID, Ongombo needs money to fund the construction of the mine and it will not cause dilution. What that really means is AFP will give away a percentage of Ongombo to another mining company to take the project to production. This could be anywhere between 51% to 75% and AFP will be the smaller partner. When mining CEO's say non dilution they mean a percentage of the mine is up for sale.

Agreed FS. AFP is the silent partner who as given away 75% of their licences to FQ for them to get the project to the funding stage of constructing the mine. XTR and GLR are the 'FQ' partner not the 'AFP' partner. XTR needs to spend $5 million and GLR $2.5 million to get to the same stage and receive 75% of the licences and are ready for the funding of the construction of the mine. XTR pays double GLR but owns twice the area. If one of the licence areas hit it big then FQ, XTR or GLR will hit the big time but AFP will be a 25% winner or a third of a winner compared to FQ, XTR or GLR. GLR only as one licence but if they hit a big deposit they will own 75% ot it.

I agree Data. I think FQ have negotiated a great deal while AFP have a deal and considering they had no cash to fund it they also must be satisfied. My issues on the AFP side is if FQ walk away they will receive nothing up front. Secondly if the decision to mine happens FQ own 75% of the mine and finally AFP have tied themselves to FQ and FQ can buy them out if and when they choose. AFP will not see anything in terms of money for at least 4 years, their other project needs funding from a new partner and they have no cash. Both GLR and XTR can prove up their licences and if there is anything worthwhile they can get a better deal and they will not be restricted to FQ.

i think cb was trying to extract as much value as possible for tne xtr deal knowing that they don't need all the money upfront and paying a dividend would not be an option unless they wound up the company. however, glr are in a much better place than xtr. people are also forgetting ferber in nevada which will be looking to drill this year (from the interim report). ka****u is the only prospect being shelved for now or just sold as ana thinks because it is definitely not a core asset. i agree data and i also mentioned on sunday that selling assets especially non core (all accept zambia - ana) at a good profit would be extremely positive going forward

Do you have any more RNS's Iky?

Beat me to it was making sure of the spelling

Selling a mine next door to someone with a bigger mine next door who already have fixed costs paid for will always be more profitable for them.

Sorry 18.5p per share

Luansobe, Kalahari or Kamatavi? They could all be sold for £50 million +. Kamativi is the one Iky was hot on. £200 million for the lot or 13.5p a share will do me. I am a statistician by heart and have invested in AIM mining a long time and most projects disapoint. If we get a good price for 3 of ours we will already be beating the odds. We will still have 6 left.

Yes Ana - that was what I was thinking, pay the tax owed and still have funds for working capital.

The company would need to be wound up to pay a dividend where a accumulated loss exists to pay a dividend which I don't think we want or we are in breach of UK accounting laws.

GLR accumulated loss starting September 2022 was £20,900,000 so we need to make this amount of profit before a dividend can be paid out of profits. The Glenover sale will I suspect reduce this but the point is we will need to make a big profit on assets before a dividend can be made. Hence, in my opinion we should start making money this year and sell some assets this year.

I see the Kalahari has non core assets and so a sale of all the licences this year would be ideal. We prove up potential areas, create massive value and then we need to sell. Most AIM miners who go all the way go bust or are bought out by thier bigger partner for a low ball offer. We need to show financial strength and rule out ever needing a placing again unless it is at a premium. However, Shinganda might be the exception for me. Remember, XTR's BR was supposed to be massive but disappointed and huge amounts of money was spent. CB we need you to reward the GLR shareholders and not overspend on difficult and subjective exploration areas.

Finally, CB needs to get street cred back and a £50 million deal will have everyone revaluing all of GLR's projects to see how many other deals can be done.

We are valued at £13 million and I would be satisfied with £50 million for our share with no more drilling, partners, cost and analysis to do and no more risk on that project. We still have 8 other projects - seems a no brainer to me. To think I thought people would suggest I was being optimistic. I would want a clear sell no future royalties or bonus - just get something in the bag and Luansobe seems the most likely at this stage. Shinganda is the one to hold on to for the real prize IMO.

I think I would sell the Luansobe project both open pit and the underground deposit and I would be satisfied with £50 million for our share equating to a 2.5p dividend due to the aggregated loss not allowing any more.

The AIM exploration market is different now and it is in a very unloved space regardless of who is in charge. At least we have the assets which due to lack of money are being worked on at slow pace but Namibia might be a very slow and difficult country to do mining. We do need something to happen soon or a more positive back ground to the AIM exploration market to lift all companies from this totally poor depressing market slump.

IMO the very reason that we do not need a deal or a partner yet is the very reason we might get a good deal soon. We are definitely in the driving seat this year.