RE: Vote Yes to oust Leon3 Jun 2026 07:31
@delion
Great explanation below. The original RNS, a typical jlp communication that to the average SH creates an impression of a sale and receipt and thus hysteria around the value of the LWP and a real likelihood it might be sold or processed at a great profit. Of course that has not happened. Theres no news no update. I am sure LC is hoping it goes away.
Jubilee metals. Large Waste Project. It was announced that JLP had sold 5% of the LWP project material for $6.75 million. Did JLP ever receive that payment? Does it appear in the accounts?
___
Short answer:
Based on all available regulatory announcements up to April 2025, there is no evidence that Jubilee Metals (JLP) ever received the US $6.75 million from the sale of 10 million tonnes of Large Waste Project (LWP) material, and the payment does not appear in any published financial accounts.
What the RNS actually said
The 3 April 2025 RNS states:
Jubilee entered into an agreement to sell 10 million tonnes of LWP material.
The estimated value of this material trade was US $6.75 million.
The purpose was to gain insight into processing performance at a partner’s facilities.
___
Crucially:
The RNS does not state that the payment was received, invoiced, or contractually guaranteed. It describes the value as an estimate and the arrangement as part of a technical evaluation process.
Does the $6.75m appear in the accounts?
- No published financials (interims or annuals) show:
- A line item for $6.75m revenue
- A receivable of that amount
- A cash inflow matching that figure
- Any note explaining receipt of funds from the LWP material sale
This strongly suggests that no payment had been received by the time of the latest available accounts.
___
Why the payment likely never appeared
Based on the wording of the RNS and typical mining‑sector practice, the most likely explanation is:
- The “sale” was not a commercial offtake, but a technical trial agreement.
- The $6.75m figure represented the implied value of the 10 Mt sample, not a confirmed transaction.
- Payment may have been conditional on further steps (e.g., full acquisition of the LWP, performance validation, or final contract execution).
This interpretation is supported by the RNS language emphasising insight, pilot trials, and due diligence, rather than revenue.
___
Summary
Was the $6.75m ever received?
No evidence of receipt.
Does it appear in the accounts?
No.
Why?
The arrangement appears to have been a technical evaluation trade, not a completed commercial sale.