Member Info for ElProfessor

Morning All,

A good bit of news - and enough to see our SP move up slightly on a day when nearly all else is once again down.

I can't tell whether the 11500 extra ounces is the total or our equivalent share. How do others read it?

Best wishes,

Prof

Other than loving seeing so many of the old Centamin crowd here - Goldgnome I was taken by your line:

I am more of an investor than a speculator, so I watch what other investors of different sorts have done over the last 10 years. Brief notes, as life is always shorter than we think.

The latter sentence is perhaps the most existentialist/ philosophical statements that I have read on these Boards.

Best wishes,

Prof

Basscadet,

Now that I have reread it I can see that you are right. But then he always is a pessimist!

Best wishes,

Prof

Seis,

I would also be overjoyed if we could just do that; I am optimistic that we will!

Best wishes,

Prof

Seis,

Well if we take a point towards the lower end of this year's forecast, say 6,000 and multiply by 50 (the ratio of 2M to 40k) then we get 300,000 tonnes of copper. Wouldn't that be nice!

Yours dreamily,

Prof

Sorry Trisor, should also said I also do not agree in full with pt 5. I do not believe the total removal of tariffs, which I would broadly support, will solve the US debt problems that you highlight.

Best wishes,

Prof

Hi HHH81,

We are on the same page other than I don't believe the 'Krasnov' element. I fear it is dogma, ignorance and ego that are the root cause.

Suspect someone is going to tell us to get back to discussing Capita shortly!

Best wishes,

Prof

Morning Trisor,

Thanks for taking the time to respond comprehensively.

I agree with all your points except perhaps 6. I would suggest that Trump is spinning a narrative that the world is unfair to the US with regards to tariffs, something that I would suggest is not, on the whole the case. Trade barriers are notoriously difficult to calculate and Trump is currently plucking numbers to suit his argument. His published formula has been widely discredited as having nothing to do with tariffs and being balance of trade centered. Overall the US shaped the rules in the post- war (WW2) order and has benefited enormously from them. The issue is that, despite its enormous wealth, it has grown greedy and is consuming/ spending, beyond what it can afford. To blame other countries for that strikes me as failing to accept responsibility for the route cause of the issue!

So in short - I do not disagree that the US needs to address its debt but I do not believe that dismantling global free trade, which has been so beneficial to the US, is the way to do it. There is an irony that it is the Republicans doing this when traditionally they were the proponents of free trade!

Best wishes,

Prof

GoCPI,

I am genuinely interest to understand what people such as Trisor, are basing their view on as , to quote Harvard economics professor N. Gregory Mankiw: "Few propositions command as much consensus among professional economists as that open world trade increases economic growth and raises living standards".

I know that not everyone has that much respect for economists, however it is interesting that a number of Trump's very wealthy backers, are also expressing dissent. For example the billionaire investor Bill Backman, warned that going ahead with new tariffs was like launching an 'economic nuclear war'; more broadly he warned: “We will severely damage our reputation with the rest of the world that will take years and potentially decades to rehabilitate”.

Other highly successful businessmen: Jamie Dimon, Stanley Druckenmiller and even Elon Musk also denounced Trump's approach. Ken Fisher, who usually does not comment on Presidential matters felt compelled to do so in the strongest terms: ' “What Trump unveiled (last) Wednesday is stupid, wrong, arrogantly extreme, ignorant trade-wise and addressing a non-problem with misguided tools.'

Hence why I am interested to understand why Trisor feels the way he does.

Best wishes,

Prof

Good evening Trisor,

What is your thinking in saying 'Brilliant from Trump' ref the 50% tariff threat on China?

Thanks,

Prof

Bought 100k this morning at 3.15 and then 100k just now at 2.93 followed by 50k at 2.99. Staggered to be getting in at under 3.00.

Hope I don't regret further extending my position here. Can't help but think that without yesterday and today's broader carnage that Leon and Johnny'c presentation would have seen a small price uptick.

Hi Terry,

Except what Trump is showing as tariffs being charged by countries on US , while making great headlines, has nothing to do with tariffs.

Full explanation at this link if you want to understand why:

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/03/economy/reciprocal-tariff-math/index.html

Alternatively key part is here:

Matching countries’ tariffs dollar for dollar is an incredibly difficult task, involving poring over each country’s tariff schedule and matching a complex array of products, each of which has a different charge for any variants.

Instead, the Trump administration used quite a simple calculation: the country’s trade deficit divided by its exports to the United States times 1/2. That’s it.

The calculation was first suggested by journalist James Surowiecki in a post on X and backed up by Wall Street analysts. The Trump administration later confirmed that was the calculation it used.

For example, America’s trade deficit with China in 2024 was $295.4 billion, and the United States imported $439.9 billion worth of Chinese goods. That means China’s trade surplus with the United States was 67% of the value of its exports — a value the Trump administration labeled as “tariff charged to USA.”

But it was no such thing.

“While these new tariff measures have been framed as ‘reciprocal’ tariffs, it turns out the policy is actually one of surplus targeting,” noted Mike O’Rourke, chief marketing strategist at Jones Trading, in a note to investors Wednesday.

“There does not appear to have been any tariffs used in the calculation of the rate. The Trump administration is specifically targeting nations with large trade surpluses with the United States relative to their exports to the United States,” he added.

Best wishes,

Prof

HI Chatmandu,

A lot of us are heavily under water here. The key question is what you think the share will do going forwards.

Good luck whatever you decide.

Best wishes,

Prof

Morning Chatmandu,

You seem to see everything about JLP very negatively. While I understand some of that I do wonder whether, if you think so poorly about them, whether you should consider selling your holding and go and finding a company that you feel more favourably about.

Best wishes,

Prof

Morning Dorfan,

Yes I agree!

Best wishes,

Prof

Morning Frog,

I think we have all been driven to cynicism by JLP's track record.

Notwithstanding my below question I do think this sounds like good news and hope that we will see a share price uptick today. Will also be interesting whether Leon puts any further information out there in today's session.

Best wishes,

Prof

Perhaps because of previous experience with JLP but I have reread what is written to look at alternatives to what first comes to mind:

'Jubilee has entered into an agreement to sell 10 million tonnes of the estimated 260 million tonnes of material to a selected multi-national metals company. The value of the 10 million tonnes material trade is estimated at US$6.75 million.'

Of note it does not say that Jubilee are selling the 10 million tonnes for $6.75million. It says that they are valued at that. If that is because the cost of extraction then we could see a lot less being paid to JLP for it.

Hopefully just being overly cautious/cynical however would be interested in others' thoughts as to this line of thinking.

Would be interesting to know if the 10 million from the 260 million is a random sample or is cherry picked grade.

In any case looks like good news both in itself and in that it provides substance to what Leon was saying about parties being interested in working with JLP on the large waste project.

Chatmandu,

As you posted on 26 Feb: 'Slater Investments Limited 358,900,153 11.71'

So certainly no decrease since then.

Best wishes,

Prof

Hi 4Everlong,

As per my post earlier I wonder whether they are delaying as the $11M remaining for the purchase is due over 12months post signing. We all know cash is not currently JLP's forte so it would make sense to slow matters down till they are generating more from copper at Roan. Only a hypothesis!

Best wishes,

Prof