Member Info for Dave85

7/13

https://investingnews.com/daily/resource-investing/precious-metals-investing/gold-investing/gold-in-the-philippines/

That being said now Didipio (OceanaGold) to reopen (14/07/21 news) after years long regional government dispute same island as Mankayan https://www.mining.com/oceanagold-to-restart-didipio-mine-after-new-deal-with-the-philippines/ progress after timeline outlined on their website here https://oceanagold.com/operation/didipo-mine/financial-or-technical-assistance-agreement/ this is clear demonstrable progress to the mining world of the actions not just words from the powers that be over there. Also, the first ever renewal of an ftaa – their page shows the still high (even with ftaa) level of royalties taxes etc bolstered still further by the recent deal on a local level (re LR vid medusa processing setup keep almost 100%?? – later link) LR - Mpsa but keep almost 100% of rev https://www.medusamining.com.au/projects/co-o-mine apparently?

Other Philippines deposits (competition) from very useful vid featuring LR https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KT0YGxWzi5Y table at 10 minutes (mankayan’s star has likely moved left now). Vid - good background to company explains the downfall re platinum alluvials (then to go at bedrock) in Colombia with EN backing with decent amount (134k) but starting up with limited funds when things didn’t go smooth enough led to ‘weak’ resource capital market saying no (?) more money and Dec 17 very heavy discounted (>50%) cr which didn’t make the difference for the by then expensive (dilution and money wise) assets (even as a stop gap for model change - partnership etc), mgmt did at least refocus towards Cu/Au assets. CB binned Choco (Pl in Columbia) for 500k along with the liability (Bzt could have gone bust? – looks possible). LR explains his vision for Cu – right but quite early (some would say wrong then). Also gives snippets re Eureka (looks great and bzt have 100%) covid likely big part of reason CB not drilled it yet. Enviro work renewed in 2019 to allow, but now lapsed (over this summer), likely easier/cheaper/quicker to re renew now tho (around 6mins and 15:30 for eureka), stresses the near term (relatively) realisation potential nature of the project (not c.f. troulli now tho). 26 mins talks about mpsa and conv to ftaa – says this crucial for western mining companies but (maybe big but) also says increasingly there is other groups who care much less (CB 13/09/21 - IDM team “have strong South East Asia experience”). From 28:30 refers to conversion from mpsa to tfaa by metals ex for runruno (mtl – I hold (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd2wLQgoJ8&t=2087s they operate a Philippine open pit, POG +100usd = rev +6m usd says DB) https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/MTL/ftaa-approval-e2ed14cldfwhmzd.html

AIMO

6/13

On 15/04/21 we had positive news with regards mining in Philippines. This will likely have pricked up the ears of the mining majors since the resources known in the ground there are only likely sitting there untouched due to the previous government anti mining stance.

https://news.mongabay.com/2021/04/complete-turnaround-philippines-duterte-lifts-ban-on-new-mining-permits/

Mankayan is a porphyry deposit (basic - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ef1MfN2CZfo more detailed with info for vectoring fertility etc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e00bpUYNdko&t=7s ) and falls outside the open pit focused restrictions (deposit starts around 300mbgl extending over 1km deep - underground method), sentiment towards the jurisdiction will have undoubtedly been effected by the hostility to mining approvals/license renewals etc. Deposits such as the globally high ranked Tampakan, the biggest known Philippine deposit and an open pit this year has also seen progress but the way forward still seems messy https://www.cnnphilippines.com/news/2021/4/26/Exclusive--Tampakan--other-giant-mines-could-strike-gold-in-wake-of-Duterte-s-new-order.html and are likely not happening until this ban (DAO 2017-10) is overturned?

https://www.philippine-resources.com/articles/2021/7/south-cotabato-to-reassess-tampakan-copper-gold-project

Apparently the ban is not explicitly lifted re open pit but more broadly mining red tape is being cut to allow renewals permitting etc more detail here – sounds good for Mankayan https://www.philippine-resources.com/articles/2021/8/lifting-the-open-pit-ban-and-using-ai-in-mining previous article referred to within https://www.philippine-resources.com/articles/2021/6/denr-studies-possible-lifting-of-ban-on-open-pit-mining

Im trying to decide whether the now confirmed likely partially enduring resultant negativity towards the jurisdiction is trumped by the reduction in competition towards Mankayan (& FSE) from open pit projects. Can’t decide but at least some improvement in sentiment has obvs been demonstrated and Mankayan (if renewed) seems close to the top on size that is not open pit and could/should therefore be considered a priority (?) if they do actually want to encourage mining and investment to make some money/derive benefits from it.

Current secretary since 08/05/17 Roy Cimatu is ex-military general and succeeded Gina Lopez (rip) who was the harder line anti miner from my impression over the years (followed quite closely re Ni supply), Cimatu – more balanced, (been allegat prev too wiki). Bzt’s Ronnie Siapno linked to one of these https://old.pcij.org/stories/a-mess-of-mines/ (Thanksgiving – no idea on what level tho). This on Luzon – example of open pit porphyry https://www.ripublication.com/irph/ijert20/ijertv13n6_50.pdf gives some context to enviro issues and understanding towards the recent years kickback against mining, esp open pit.

AIMO

5/13

From a sub 7m mcap there is quite a margin of error to create value – when I like to buy, and I have been. As posted 24/10/20 achieving the listing (meaning license renewed) will, imo, make mankayan real again and if next years re pricing of copper (my guess 5 – 8 usd range from May/June it may start to test new highs (coincidentally option expiry time)) and gold (2k-2.5k - my guess H1) occurs as I’m guessing and asx investors see the updated jorc, NPVs, development options, potential to complement nearby deposits and exploration upside, continued Phil license positivity, etc should be quite exciting.

Very very very rough guesses for fun, once/if license renewed and prospectus or other source of detail becomes available likel feel more comfortable. Perhaps approx 5m usd for pfs then sale price around 40% NPV (maybe 30% for xtra phil discount). Hopefully conservatively 1b usd npv (smaller option development?) sold for 20% of npv and bzt still hold 10% would yield 0.1 x (1b x 0.2) = 20m usd, more likely 2b npv sold for 30% of npv and bzt still hold 20% would yield 0.2 x (2b x 0.3) = 120m usd, seemingly possible if guesses go well and many things work out (longer shot) 3b npv sold for 30% of npv and bzt still hold 27.5% would yield 0.275 x (3b x 0.3) = approx. 250m usd. Assuming 5b bzt shares (25%ish diltution) the three yields on a per share basis would be 0.4p, 2.4p and 5p. If copper and gold really get going and sale is delayed so consensus rates prices as long term for sale valuation consideration purposes npv of >5b could quite easily occur – possibility not probability?

Unlike last deal we want a high initial listing valuation as we receive a set percentage from which we maybe diluted unless we fund pro rata.

My reasons for guesses in the Cu and Au prices are looking back to previous bull markets, 2004 - 2005 for gold where it was supported (closing basis) by the 20 month ma during a period of consolidation following an initial 3yr rise following breaking above the 20mma in September 2001, whereas for copper the 12mma supported the price through a period of consolidation following an initial 10 month rise following breaking above the 20mma in May 2003 (around the time this was happening - https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1239197/000106299306000188/form20fa.htm (justifies the idea of continual acquisition strategies ahead of assumed metal price transitions), needs to be ‘choice’ tho (not suggesting close similarity just broad idea) and times were different then for sure – it worked out spectacularly well for them >150usd/share, I think in the end (7yrs). One investing strategy I try - find existing assets highly leveraged to something I think will go up in price (esp if uncommon worldwide &/or globally significant - currently uneconomic even better) and keep an eye on what moves are made on the asset/s when others feel the time is near for that price rise – fascinating so far.

AIMO

4/13

Max value (with assumptions) £1.82m + £3.23m + 5.6m = £10.65 + 20% ongoing investment in AC (direct)

Deal terms same as in 2019 so basically this is same deal with minor fx fluctuation and poss uncertainty over pre ipo value? Major difference, imo, is on per share basis as £10.65m / TVR 2,989,901,039 = 0.00356pps + 20% AC (new projects).

13/09/21 rns IDM deal completely different highly opaque (at this stage) discussed above but essentially £112k initial funding, max 267k GBP carried interest to 27.5% of IDM vehicle to hold subsidiary to hold holding vehicle of mankayan. £379k / TVR 3,939,951,615 = 0.000096pps (if get mpsa renewed) + 27.5% IDM (indirect).

This for me is how I’m comparing the deals (beyond lack of ongoing direct interest), the listco shares (as discussed in my post 24/10/20) would likely not be a good route to go if a strong relist valuation is achieved in a buoyant copper gold asx market – seemingly likely & now hopeful, remembering this is in comparision to the increased maintained interest. The 3.32m for dfs, has also to be accounted for within the 7.5%. It is not a slam dunk no brainer, all (other) things considered, that taking into account the copper gold price moves between deals (06/08/2019 200dma 1306usd /oz for gold, 2.77usd/lb for copper, 200wma 1260usd/oz for gold, 2.65usd/lb for copper, compared to 13/09/2019 200dma 1808usd /oz for gold, 4.11usd/lb for copper, 200wma 1531usd/oz for gold, 3.09usd/lb for copper) that this one is much better. The ASX is a ‘better’ natural resource exchange c.f. SGX and more likely to get behind a Philippines project c.f. London but the lack of detail on the structure of IDM and the opacity surrounding its owners and leaders makes things much harder (no related parties are disclosed). I can’t help but compare this rns to info rns’d (13/01/21) by aim listed uru on listing a project on the TSXV perhaps with that being a fundamental change of business more info was a prerequisite (we saw a lot more for the mmih deals too (for that reason?)) – I don’t know, case of blue rhino it was also a previously listed co and the detail rns’d initially, allowed a reasonable idea of valuation given the concurrent financing.

I guess given the value I see in Mankayan, the ownership should trump thr commitment and shares. The likes of CB (he’s said jvs - worst kind of dilution) and CC have very decent stakes and likely warrants/options etc on bzt shares at cheap prices so there is a seeming self-interest. A successful listing could spark serious interest and allow a step change in fund raising ability for Bzt (could be concurrent financing upon listing) for stake preservation and its other funding requirements and hopefully finesse towards optimal financing timings can be achieved (CR coming now at a discount (sp 0.15p) would be suboptimal after the 50 and 200 day ma have been >0.2p since early April up to last week in August.

AIMO

3/13

The strength of the asset is clear from the benefits being derived from leveraging even an option. Was not to last unfortunately with deal termination confirmation rns 22/01/14 preluding tax law reform strife.

Mining tax reform background concerns escalated through 2014 with rns provided to market 11/08/14 acknowledging the issue and resultant reduced interest in mankayan https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/analysis/conflicting-opinions-philippine-mining-sector%e2%80%99s-tax-burden-complicate-reforms shows the uncertainty. Details when sorted 12/11/18 https://taxreform.dof.gov.ph/tax-reform-packages/package-2plus-mining-taxes/ uncertainty from tax side reduced but licensing/permitting side prevailed, now easing substantially. Now then, an overall reduced uncertainty and improving environment.

07/10/19 rns MMJV (incl 3 projects, 2 outwith bzt) to SGX listed CHX via RTO. Bzt would get; to keep 20% in AC, max £1.82 exploration period requirement funding (IFR part i), assuming mpsa renewal £3.23m towards dfs (IFR part ii), £5.87m consideration shares in CHX/listco (think = to 9.09% of listco given 10m pre ipo value and assuming 100m price of MMJV to CHX (could have been lower – ‘valuation report’ x discount – neither public? I don’t know)).

Max value (with assumptions) £1.82m + £3.23m + 5.87m = £10.97 + 20% ongoing investment in AC (direct)

Features of deal; reasoning – asset level strategic partner to reduce dilution of development (SH’s seen at choco), provide some carried funding for maintenance and progression, benefit via public listing, was fundamental change AIM Rule 15 = GM 30/10/19 (conditions precedent satisfied 13/11/19 with disposal completion 18/11/19), consolidation shares subject to lock-in (possible dilution – out of bzt mgmt. hands possibly), JV formed to govern pre-emption rights dilution divestment plans etc, assign £4.18m CDMC loan owed to bzt to AC for 1usd, dfs cost over £3.23 bzt to fund accordance to AC shareholding or dilutes, identified reserved matters for AC – no new projects (lol), share rights variations etc. £10.97m / TVR at time of deal = 998,773,038 = 1.1pps + 20% AC.

05/10/20 (ignoring fx fluctuation) rns MMJV (incl 3 projects, 2 outwith bzt) to SGX listed AsiaPhos via RTO. AsiaPhos – phosphate co with maybe messy liabilities/agreements/entagments? Bzt would get; to keep 20% in AC, max £1.82 exploration period requirement funding (IFR part i), assuming mpsa renewal £3.23m towards dfs (IFR part ii), £5.6m (still 10m sgd) consideration shares in CHX/listco (think = to 12.2%?? of listco assuming same (not specified in rns) 10m pre ipo value and assuming 100m price of MMJV to AsiaPhos (could have been lower – ‘valuation report’ – not public (I don’t know) x discount – now quantified @ 50%)). Consideration issuance sp quantified @ 0.005 sgd

AIMO

2/13

Their deferred consideration being, imo, modest (hopefully (idm value)) – 2 tranches of 2m aud either in vwap IDM shares (most likely, imo) or according to independent valuation, at times of… 1). pfs detailing npv 100% over capex (npv:capex ratio of 2+, likely from my perspective and strong testament to the projects likely economics considering its stated example indicative ranges of LOM and large capex (they agreed to it – also think it’s likely)). 2). Sale of or decision to mine. They still apparently owned the 80% AC 06/09/21 (bzt not been given or got them back by then). Still hurdle of condition precedent 4). IDM-MMIH actually have to complete, rest of the conditions seem less doubtful to me.

On first appearance this deal, imo, is not as good (not by a long way on immediate vague info), there appears no maintained, ongoing, direct interest in Mankayan percentage - holding in AC (carried to dfs or long way towards at least), replaced by holding in vehicle that would hold 100% of AC…comparing the deals without knowing the identity/capabilities of the other IDM shareholders is difficult/meaningless (who they are is pretty important along with their amenability to bzt – e.g. do we have right to pro rata fund project expenditure maintaining ownership etc (likely) - zero detail so far tho, 2019 deal mentioned pre-emption right this one doesn’t (so far)), but from the three entries under consideration payable by MMIH 2019 i). is partially taken care of seemingly now (deemed included (spent/done bits and amount reduced – but how much) (they still get further considerations tho, but only on renewal) whilst ii). & iii). - amounting to >9m gbp of value (>bzt mcap) being - 3.23m commitment to dfs and 5.87m in shares of listco upon rto now have to be accounted for by the 7.5% increase in ongoing project exposure.

Given that past ‘valuation’ events when less was known (valued higher /lb copper and /oz gold then vs now on like for like basis) include; at acquisition Mankayan (or specifically AC) was valued at £5.46m, “valuing Asean at approximately £5.46 million” at the time they also raised £4.77 million net of expenses likely most of which was subsequently spent drilling and increasing known resources at Mankayan, https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/BZT/acquisition-4keqerk5ogrmjmb.html

Looking at the previous deals 05/10/11 rns complete disposal of asset for non refundable 7m usd cash payment and 63m usd more cash on option exercise to 31/01/13.Option was later updated/extended https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/BEZANT-RESOURCES-PLC-4006345/news/Bezant-Resources-plc-Update-on-Option-over-the-Mankayan-Project-17838740/ with further significant benefits for bzt being 2.5m usd non refundable cash payment (option exercise cash reduced to 60.5m usd), bzt 2013 license commitment paid by GF and GF subscribing to 7.5m usd of bzt stock at 25.97 (5% premium).

AIMO

1/13

Bit of time to digest recentish events at bzt some thoughts and notes to record reasons I’m choosing to up my stake on recent drop. I’m no expert on any of this stuff, likely some mistakes but hopefully the gist is in the right direction. Mix of company history, research agglomeration, deal comparison, recent events and guesstimates towards future potential with random thoughts and notes. If someone new to company it could maybe give some colour but posting for personal future review in the main as usual.

13/11/21 rns IDM (australia) to acquire 100% Asean Copper (bvi) – meaning, they will initially own 64% (40% and 40% of 60%) of CMDC (the prize – holder of mpsa no.057-96-CAR) and have option (expires 30/06/22) over rest (36%).

BZT will own 27.5% of IDM – meaning exposure to 17.6% (27.5% of 64%) of CMDC initially and 27.5% (upon option exercise) compared to 64% previous to 04/10/19 (MMIH transaction date) and 12.8% post MMIH deal pre option and 20% post deal and option.

Very interested to know who/what the other IDM shareholders are, imo, given the commod environment and improving macro 72.5% could/should indicate they bring a lot to the table. Initial funding does not follow pro rata ownership with bezants 90k equating to 30% of the 300k total. Successfully securing the mpsa renewal (due 11/11/21) after the 16/03/21 CDMC submission will be a good start, vastly more significant imo, c.f. the provision of max 500k aud (267k GBP - not a great deal given apparent interest in bzt last 12 months e.g.120m shares @ 0.25 incl fees etc (<4% dilution) not saying its that easy/simple but still, guess it removes a risk) to MMIH (condition renewal proceed payment). Bzt carried through for 27.5% post MMIH payment but that is as far as the carry goes apparently (not very far – relatively (to 2019)).

CB comment re idm - whose financial and technical team have strong south east Asian experience, (interesting) wonder how big the ‘team’ is and their specific experience, MMIH had good people - I thought, hopeful of an upgrade.

Bzt and MMIH have both agreed to this, there is no lengthy fight/dispute as seemed possible drawing towards license renewal date. Bzt did have right to terminate so?? MMIH seem to have missed out tbh, they do get something but not much (c.f. successful rto), imo. They maintained projects standing (extended expl license period – covid times), the exploration period expenditure (2.25m usd commitment – actual spend unknown – got it reduced), updated the jorc to 2012 etc, they failed the RTO/s for whatever reason and CB acted in time – it appears (but how much was the negotiation of current asx deal compromised by impending renewal and MMIH action?)

AIMO

Bought some for the first time in years, been considering averaging down for quite a while now. Decided not to wait any longer on todays news, brought av from 5.63p to 1.35p. Looking forward to near term developments.

GLA ATB

https://mobile.twitter.com/numerco/status/1437867750387507200

Spot passes above our Curzon offtake (or the figure mentioned "above"/"average" at least).

Remember posting at the time I liked the option claw back ability.

This really is rip your face off. After the years, quite surreal really.

Find the water then finance (drilling now), tiris 'happening' seems potentially very close all of sudden.

https://www.miningreview.com/features-analysis/aura-energy-concludes-uranium-offtake-for-tiris/

AIMO ATB

...more for me today, averaging up a bit.

Expected news of plans/developments by now and with the strength in natural gas price, likely reducing opportunity cost and recent ability to redeploy profit seemed like a good choice.

Had a bit of in out in at fog finally too (from first min after 8am on news - luckily saw the rns), aex av down - an increasing priority.

This winter good be a good time for the sector.

AIMO ATB

2/2

I'm awaiting the swedes decision...

https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Swedish-government-delays-repository-decision

Finland has made the commitment

https://youtu.be/kYpiK3W-g_0

As I've posted previously Swedish public opinion towards nuclear power is trending more positive, situation that is similar at the political level.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/nuclear-energy-to-make-a-comeback-in-sweden/

If the haggan projects 800m lbs ever switches to getting priced in, in any meaningful way - another game changer for aura (after the likely explorer/developer to funded developer and developer to producer transitions. Much more realistic at this stage is tiris - with new mgmt/BoD being well connected/related to likely sources of sufficient funding (inclu - remember when she committed to sxx - I was holding).

Btw just in - https://www.svt.se/nyheter/inrikes/ibrahim-baylan-avgar-lamnar-politiken

Only aware of energy fuels (uuuu) and paladin (pdn) that made the transition to producer during the last cycle - both have very interesting historic price charts. I've been holding aura since 2017 as I believed aura could be one of the very few to do the same the next go around.

It has been painful and frustrating for much of that time, my luck with ufo (as posted 07/12/20) relived those feelings and now any gains are extra over and seen as a bonus in some ways.

A more enjoyable period looks to be coming to fruition. Annoyance over being 'excluded' (imo) from the recent RI prevails but in the past now.

Discl - started minor trimming yesterday and will continue incrementally as market cap grows - so can add back some if pull backs occur, making volatility more comfortable.

AIMO ATB GLA

1/2

https://adventuresincapitalism.com/2021/09/02/the-new-gbtc/

https://youtu.be/thzfeSYxaww

Sput/sruuf changing things up, accelerating market movements - breaking out start of Sept along with U3O8 spot on 5 year basis just as market seasonality kicks.

I been quiet here as still unsure of sp movement once asx finally lifted from suspension (thought my have happened q2 originally) - just been holding my remaining shares firm over summer...but, a lot of v v cheap shares issued to asx holders/addressee's.

Not much to choose from round the world, esp those with a high chance of turning on production inside of 2/3 years; bky - looking increasingly controversial/delayed (for now); far - mainly V, others more diversified eg mka and thr. Aura - despite my caution over unknown trading pattern and unknown timing of asx lift, is pretty well the only place to go on lse. Gcl good aswell, but highly company diversified and very well known relatively, yca - a trade on the physical - without the same leverage.

Since the uranium spot price breakout and proven effect of sput my caution regarding relist is reducing as the likely large increase in selling will likely be much more strongly countered by buying pressure (from visibility of undervaluation relative to the likes of boe.asx) (posted 07/07/20 - where will U price be on relist tho? - helped me hold)

Will be much happier when/if 1. sufficiently proximal and productive tiris water supply/supplies identified (ideally to allow for the 3m lb ramp up) 2. Asx relist is in rear view and price has stabilised after absorbing the expected volume surge.

As I've posted many times the assets here are great but the fighting over them changed the company over the years the fight took. PIs on aim likely affected by major dillution then consolidation followed by more significant dillution (bad combo) - there have been those that posted they have given up and sold out.

The recent decision against bky has pretty much made aura the london stock with the most leveraged exposure to uranium price movement (on a single company basis (for now) (unlike gcl)). Ive had good experiences the last 12 months or so holding companies that have uncommon exposure to hot sectors. Ufo for silver (posted 24/06/20), arb for bitcoin (posted 16/07/20) hopefully now something similar could be underway with aura for uranium.

AIMO

Started adding some back here this afternoon sub 2p, gold stock (as I now treat eee) sentiment 'benefitting' (from a buyers perspective) from a low ebb currently, not sure how long it will last but hopefully I'm up for the wait.

AIMO ATB

3/3

In 3 years (-1 day) - realistic chance, imo, zeb has dfs well underway/existing pfs/mining license/M&I resource/proven prob reserve/Ni >10usd & up for sale for >1b usd (uru would still have 16.4m shares) that could easily still be over 10% and see a dividend >100m quid) then there is the royalty on production or negotiated sale thereof. Possibilities and maybes – I know, but I don’t see any fundamental flaw which definitively precludes this and once 10s of thousands of investors are aware of zeb and the pieces begin to fall into place piecemeal the near to medium term speculation surrounding enviro commodities, imo, will look far ahead and price in what are (as possibilities) plain to see for relatively few now (and thus edge will be gone).

https://noblemineralexploration.com/site/assets/files/5940/nr20191230.pdf

Noble and spruce ridge (SHL.TSXV - with 135m shares outstanding with $17.5mcap (at around 0.13 sp)) ‘had’ (material control of) this project for along time, now they don’t, CNC have it and have run with it having created significant momentum/credibility and value for the project and shareholders respectively with a present mcap at multiples to any previously attributed. By the time of the inargural drill results “10,000,000 shares (~18% of Canada Nickel) to be distributed to Noble shareholders under a plan of arrangement” - only 18% (not 20% - they’d (noble) been diluted before the ‘arrangement’ to distribute was even agreed). As for SHL they originally got 20m cnc shares but again distributed them and then reduced further via dividends (too quickly, imo/in hindsight?).

URU/JZ have/has waited longer (& had the 2014 acquired 100% ownership strong hand position), until the timing for Ni was better (JZ recent comments “the timing is right”) they have achieved a far superior initial interest in the acquiror (ZBNI 75%) other than the achievement of a measured resource (lots of expensive infill drilling) CNC are not really all that much further down the path to production/sale of project cf with zeb, imo and the mcap variance is astounding. CNC deposit commonly less than 50m from surface btw high tonnage with significant (resource wide) Co and PGE credits, better jurisdication (by Fraiser measure) & up to date pea, personally think they ‘deserve’ a higher valuation - Trudeau tho - could prove problematic or a significant drag at least.

Personally, I still have deep seated niggles re my uru investment and as the mcap increases these will likely become more significant, but, so far at least, ignoring these has worked out ok.

Very quick google recently….

Other listed global scale bulk tonnage Ni sulphide deposits mcap (usd)
FPX Decar 88m
GIGA Turnagain 36m
AMC Kun Manie 33m
CNC Crawford 200m

Privately owned
Waterton Dumont for sale >500m expected apparently.

Very widespread

Just trying to condense various aspects – many moving parts for sure.

AIMO ATB

2/3

If no conversion by 30/08/21 (a Monday) then maybe likely the ‘issued at 85p’ figure will be significantly lower than 1,552,942 as conv at higher price during 35% discounted conversion during (A), accordingly (3i) would be in play and likely lower in the number issued cf (3).

Currently seems worst case scenario if (1) thru (4) occurs – shares in issue 3,199,633 with £1.3m cash raised (enough to cover (B)?

Then there is the ZBNI dilution to think about, the mcap at which the next funds are raised (hopefully a decent amount (>2m cad) and at multiple to listing price (>1 cad) (CNC raised at 0.4 but climate was not so good)) will, imo be pretty important.
Ni price (currently well over 8.5usd/lb), mining license, peer valuations and decent promotion should/could be helpful in this – but depends what people think and want (as usual). They’ve already diluted us ‘extra’ on the ‘low’ (hopefully), before it even listed.

https://www.accesswire.com/561532/Spruce-Ridge-Sells-Its-Interest-in-the-Crawford-Nickel-Cobalt-Sulphide-Project
https://canadanickel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/NR20191128.pdf

“Noble will receive $2 million cash and 12 million shares of Canada Nickel (approximately 24% of the pro forma outstanding shares of Canada Nickel) for the transfer of the Project from Noble to Canada Nickel, and at a special shareholder meeting currently scheduled for December 27, 2019, Noble will seek approval to distribute 10 of those 12 million shares to its shareholders through a ************** by plan of arrangement (the “Arrangement”), with Noble retaining the other 2 million shares of Canada Nickel.”

NOB.TSXV only got 24% originally form Crawford and now they only got <3% (assuming they still have 2m shares out of the 67m issued at CNC). Crawford was way less advanced than Zeb and has needed much more drilling/exploration/studys to get to the resources/financial understanding it now has (they have measured resource now zeb doesn’t – overtaken + pea is up to date) but if noble had kept those 12m shares (even tho at only 24% starting point) those shares would be worth (assuming 200m cnc mcap) $36m and with 187m issued shares that’s more than their current mcap at 0.15 sp. But 10m of them were distributed to common shareholders of noble how many held on to see the real big multiples (who were the buyer from those who sold?) – maybe sometimes long lock in times could be beneficial.

AIMO

1/3

Trying to aggregate some info for ease of access to remind myself in future, if people see mistakes please correct me – likely to be a few tbh.

Prima facie potential dilution here includes (rns 06/05/20 and 26/05/21)

- - - @85p

(1) Up to 06/11/21 235,294 subscription warrants (rns 06/05/20) expire 06/11/21

(2) 500,000 usd worth of boothbay conv note (assuming x/r @ 0.72 gives 423,530 shares) - note matures 31/05/22

(3) Warrants attaching to each new ordinary share (conversion loan warrants) (if issued during (2) with exercise period of 18 months – 423,530

(3i) Any warrants attaching to each new share (if issued during (2) but at a price other than 85p (imo now likely above) – one warrant issued for each share issued thru conversion and all these conversion loan warrants at 85p irrespective of conv price/number issued during conv, with exercise period of 18 months

(4) 470,588 director fee share warrants (JZ) exercisable until 06/11/21

- - - @ unknown share price

(A) Any none converted boothbay convertables (2) issued via conversion after 29/08/21 – after this 35% discount to vwap clauses kick in.

(B) Alegana’s owed £263,111 (presumably plus any directors fees accrued since 06/05/20)

- - - Apparent possible dilution @85p being…

235,294 + 423,530 + 423,530 + 470,588 = 1,552,942 raising £1,320,000 but causing (current issued 1,646,691) 94.3% dilution.

The @85p total is likely the apparent worst-case scenario now that the listing has actually occurred (death spiral mechanisms take multiple conversions spread normally at least weeks apart outside of high demand periods) so the time to have maximised the number of shares acquired via conversions would have been likely before now (lower likely buying = greater downward force on sp). There is now (currently (potential further extensions notwithstanding)) only until 29/08/21 – 12 trading days including today and market interest and sp are much higher for the 85p conv option on the ‘main’ 500k chunk.

AIMO

Just finished watching the update from Matt Geiger (rainy morning & sore legs) below. I agree that juniors are looking cheap and my pf has seen a big down turn in paper value as a result. To me it seems like a buying op tho.

https://youtu.be/MRrzy4UjvI8

Phosphate discussed from 21 mins.

Topped up to a nice round 2.5m this morning sub 1.2p - averaging up.

Not much choice for phosphate exposure apparently and prices at highs at the mo - could be a good combination if good news arrives.

https://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=dap-fertilizer&months=120

https://www.metal.com/Rare-Earth-Oxides/201102250162

Steep upwards trajectories, glenover news over due, CB likely in a strong position re glenover upon favourable record of decision, relative to the last several years.

From half year report

"The final TSF design report was completed by Golder Associates (Pty) Ltd in November 2020 and has been submitted to the DWS for its RoD, with a decision expected during Q1 2021."

"Glenover continued to identify potential investors in the Glenover project and initiated preliminary discussions, which are ongoing."

SA been in bits for a while so not all good but it'll pass at some point and hopefully glenover can be appreciated by a wider group of market participants once again (had to trim some of another rre stock today to achieve some of the funds required - hopefully timed it ok).

Thanks to all the posters sharing info/opnions on here and the research into the KCB angle. SFR subscription at 2.68p (>120% above my buying today).

Most attention is seemingly placed on kcb and definately understandably so, kash*tu drilling and glenover RoD could be decent sp appreciation catalysts too.

Re posting so can find them easier big thanks to each poster btw.

https://webcast.boardroom.media/player/sandfire-resources-limited/20210802/NaN60f7d12aa09daf001bf8c2f4

https://twitter.com/Sharedata12/status/1419754560030187520?s=19

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUDX0sTgNYg

https://youtu.be/-Cm64QYW5ow

https://galileoresources.com/wp-content/uploads/Kalahari-Copper-Belt-Investor-Presentation.pdf

https://galileoresources.com/wp-content/uploads/Shard-Capital-Galileo-12-7-2021-R.pdf

Following on from my post 12/11/2020.
(on xtr bb), similarly - I'm happy with my glr holding for now, until/unless I can buy more sub 1p.

~31.5m bzt, 2.5m glr, ~770k xtr
Previously
13.5m bzt, 1.8m glr, 1m xtr.

Still demonstrating a decent amount of belief in CB, certainly hoping some part of 1/3 of these does indeed further deliver.

AIMO ATB

2/2

My view is based upon the below.

From https://www.osc.ca/sites/default/files/pdfs/irps/ni_20110624_43-101_mineral-projects.pdf

Section 2.2 (a) re all disclosures of mineral resources “uses only the applicable mineral resource and mineral reserve categories set out in sections 1.2 and 1.3;”

Section 1.2 “In this Instrument, the terms “mineral resource”,” etc “have the meanings ascribed to those terms by the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy”….” adopted by CIM Council”

Which states resources are by a qualified person, seen here https://undervaluedequity.com/cim-definition-standards-for-mineral-resources-and-mineral-reserves/

Section 2.4 goes on to say “Despite section 2.2, an issuer may disclose an historical estimate, using the original terminology” which is what Caracle has done in their independent tech report on Zeb.

Contained within the same clause the document stipulates (part g) that the issuer states g (i) “a qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves” and g (ii) “the issuer is not treating the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves.”

Which is what they have done.

AIMO ATB

1/2

See 1.5.1 BRC’s independent tech report on Zeb available here… https://www.sedar.com/DisplayCompanyDocuments.do?lang=EN&issuerNo=00048558

“The 2012 historical mineral resource estimate used categories that conformed to CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (CIM, 2010) at the time of completion of the estimate, as outlined in NI 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects. However, neither the Principal Author nor a qualified person have done sufficient work to classify any of the historical estimates as current mineral resources and as such the Principal Author and the Issuer are treating the tonnages and grades reported as historical mineral resources. Investors are cautioned that the historical mineral resource estimates do not mean or imply that economic deposits exist on the Property.”

This explains the statement in the filing statement ref to no current mineral resources or reserves (current being the crucial word). The reference to ‘reserve’ in the statement is insignificant (consequence of a mandated entry of a prescribed phrase) as no reserve can exist without at least a PFS level study and only a PEA has been completed. The non-current status of the resource is more nuanced, imo. By definition a qualified person (thru MSA) had done ‘sufficient work’ otherwise an NI 43-101 would not exist its just that that qualified person is either not apparently available to/involved in Caracle Creek and/or simply the passage of time means the term historical has to be/has been applied. Rocks insitu and left alone do not change significantly over a decade. The Canadian method that was used was & is internationally recognised, robust and very highly regarded (and has been since 01/02/01 (updated in 2004 and 2010). If it was there then it is there now, imo.

No resource estimate - current, historic or whatever can ever ‘mean’ that an economic deposit/s exist (although a reasonable expectation of viability is mentioned), that is not the main purpose. Resource estimate is concerned with how much of something (Ni in this case) is present at a particular cut of grade (0.1% here), a whole host of other factors/assumptions need to be considered to estimate economic viability. The preliminary economic assessment of 2012 (Croll et al., 2012) did exactly (early stage circa +/- 20% accuracy) that, unfortunately it remains outside of the public domain, I think.

AIMO

From BRC filing today “Trading in the Common Shares is currently halted pending completion of customary filings with the Exchange in respect of the Transaction. Trading is expected to resume on the Exchange following completion of customary filings with the Exchange.”

BRC Filing statement 29/07/211 pg10 – clearly describes a “final exchange bulletin” as meaning “the bulletin which is issued by the Exchange following Closing and the submission of all Post-Approval Documents which evidences the final Exchange acceptance of the Transaction”

Two examples of what I think happens and what to wait for, imo.

https://pathwayhealth.ca/pathway-health-corp-announces-final-exchange-bulletin-and-commencement-of-trading/

https://investingnews.com/news/gold-investing/royal-fox-announces-receipt-of-final-approval-from-the-tsxv/

If these are anything to go by probably not long to wait.

The path towards much more widespread investor visibility re Zeb looks to be getting short, meanwhile this BB seems in argumentative/misinformed/confusion mode, imo - craving volatility and volume pre listing/conversion/pr/arbitrage etc etc - many possibilities, opportunities, permutations.

Knowledge being power - dependant on two V’s (relatively at least) - interesting.

Happens when it happens (if it happens )- I think it will.

AIMO ATB