Member Info for Foresthomeshotm

@real

2 wrongs etc. Costs nothing to be nice

@gotreal

Just corrected on the facts, not insulted or ridiculed.

@4ever

We should all try to follow those principles of your great post.

@junior as you say comes across very well, clearly is inside the detail more than most and is very able to create a persuasive argument(s).

One has to look wider than the narrative though to see the actual position.

Molefe was wholly owned by jlp and its value was only jlps. The value of Molefe is yet to be fully determined( drills and Jorc). Jlp allegedly has all the cash it needs to do what it needs from the SA sale (or so we were told in the SA sale argument).

So we must assume jlp don't need this cash (by issuing up to 300mil new shares) desperately but are instead securing "expertise " jlp don't have. That of course remains to be evidenced by jlp.

What we do not know and have never had it presented is whether the value we are trading with, is leveraging in greater value and whether that route and those particular partners represent the best route and the best value.

GLD have been given a stake. Now its proposed to give a further stake to yet another partner. Whether that represented or represents value was never evidenced. Is the dilution leveraging greater value? Again nothing. That GLD deal was never evidenced but 700k seems incredible value for GLD. Look at what Molefe could really be worth and then work out whether the 700K expertise is worth the multi millions in % terms that were traded. Look i not saying anything untoward is happening or has happened but it does create unnecessary and unhelpful suspicion. If there is nothing to hide just provide timely transparent information well in advance to all shareholders so they can make fully informed decisions before a vote.

If jlp continue to operate in the way they do and have(by all accounts) then eventually shareholders will take matters into their own hands.

Its not a big or unreasonable ask is it?

@junior

Well structured professional reasoned responses.

300m new shares is real authority to dilute jlp......its not solely ring fenced to Molefe. Jlp own Molefe its part of jlps value.

As of now that value is not fully known an element you missed or chose to ignore?

We agree there could be other partners and other structuring arrangements. SH do not know the value being traded and whether this represents the only and best value option

It's healthy most of us can have mature and reasoned discussions and debate.

@junior

Its a vote to stop dilution of 300 000 000 new shares. No one yet know the true value of what Molefe is really worth etc (drilling jorc dependent)

You all say the 25m is still there they dont need the cash. We'll great no need to make hasty knee perk decisions then. There are many mining partners. This may not be the best company or the only company or the best deal or structure for shareholders.

Glad you agree about the poor shareholder communications, skin in the game, copper delivery,LWP sable project G etc.

Its the best time to vote no when we have all this cash and value before it gets whisked away right under our noses

@delion

There is little trust and you can see why? All those fair questions and now more proposed dilution potentially 300 000 000 new shares.

Vote no now. We have had too many broken promises/lies/failed or buried initiatives terrible communication and updates

There are many many options to exploit Molefe. There's no urgency and there are many experienced partners that will want to be involved when the jorc is completed following drill 2 (and or further drills). We have no idea what value we are trading with yet only guesses.

A vote no now is not a no vote for ever. It just prevents instant dilution authorisation and sends a clear message to jlp management.

@bottomsup

Self declared at over 5m shares yet you seem to blindly accept anything that jlp say. Either you are privy to more information than the rest of us, don't have such shares or have enough money not to care ( if it is your pension pot then you need to)

Personally I am not in that position as I suspect many others are too. I have bought the copper dream story sold to me in the SA sale prospectus. However the no need for further dilution, future dividends, enough funds from the SA sale and 4500 to 5000mtpa copper in 2026 don't seem to be reality any longer. By all accounts this seems to be an historic jlp theme and specific to LC?

You own 2m more shares than LC and they were gifted to him. JM only bought 1m at around 3p i seem to remember. Still a tiny investment given he knows all the detail. Does not sit right or fill one with confidence. Then there's the Board share ownership. That doesn't look good either. Can you blame me for not being a little suspicious given what is being asked on 2 lines of info in an rns and no updates on all the other valid points and questions most on here have @sirboring for example.

@4everlong.

"Your comment reflects the current status on this board. When someone raises a potential issue that doesn't suit the corporate narrative, attack the credibility of the poster."

Has to be one of best posts on here in recent days.

I've already voted No.

Understandably that's brought criticism because its before LC presentation.

No podcast PowerPoint from LC will convince me to allow someone I No longer trust to be given the power to dilute my investment by as much as 300 000 000 new shares.

First explain

1)where the SA 25m has and will be spent

2)the Roan upgrade progress

3)the Sable upgrade progress

4)copper production progress 2026 2027 targets and profit profiles based upon investments and a stated copper price

5) LWP where the trail results? Where the partnership deal?

The list goes on and on like those that will not address the concerns but only back LC and jlp management regardless. You can all see who they are.

EVERYONE is entitled to their views and opinions.

I've used my vote to STOP MORE DILUTION and to send a clear message. We deserve much better SH communications and we WILL hold management and the board to account for performance and delivery.

Wheres the 25m SA receipts gone?

Where are all the outstanding updates on LWP, Sable upgrade, Roan upgrade, revised copper targets etc etc?

Ive voted No.

If management are allowed to continue in this way then its just the start.

The SA sale circular was very clear. Enough cash to exploit copper and our zambian assets.

No dilution needed.

Potential dividends there was to be so much cash.

So where's the cash been spent so quickly? On what to achieve what? Where's the vast increase in copper and at close to 14k pmt wheres all the profits?

LC has not changed. Cannot change. Will not change.

Meanwhile we pay him 600k a year and he doesn't spend any of his own cash on cheap jlp shares.

JM has done nothing to change things and neither have the management. There needs to be a full review clear out and realignment forced by SHs.

Ive written to the board setting out what's been stated in RNSs what's actually not happened and whats not communicated or reported. I set out what must change and in what time frame.

If I dont get a reply I know why and what to do.

Meanwhile I want all new fantasies stopped and total focus and effort on copper production until the promised numbers and promised upgrades are fully operational and working. The rest does not have to be done now it can wait. It's just another distraction and perfect excuse as to why all the previous promises won't be delivered. That stops now and a NO VOTE sends a clear message from unhappy shareholders which seem to be the majority. No more character assassinations on here. Let us all just focus on what they promised us and what they have and have not delivered including where all that SA cash has actually gone?

@loot

Complete fantasy rubbish. 95m SA sale 25m received plus sales etc.

No excuses no more rope. It's a no from PIs.

Lets assume its not in SH best interest then SH have to get rid take control of the board. Loans and agreement can always be unbound refinanced etc.

It may be a brilliant deal for SH lets see.

Selling up is always an option. Personally im not going to lose my hard earned money by selling low. SH control the board and company. That's what motions and votes are for. Boards can be replaced and employees sacked. I don't see things as that bad especially with the SA sale done.

@loot

Exactly well said. This site seems to be infiltrated with LC and jlp cheerleaders.

Even missed targets are hailed as good new. As a shareholder quire frankly ive waited long enough now and had a belly full of empty evaporating promises.

Selective in your response to all the points made.

You are not the company representative and I certainly don't report to you.

Ill address my concerns directly to the Board of jlp in writing as I believe all other shareholders should do if they have concerns.

It does seem that even the most optimistic on this bb have now had their fill of LC jlp and the board and feel they have been repeatedly misled and lied to.

We all managed to stop the AGM dilution attempt and I know this one can be stopped unless there is a compelling rational reasoned and fully explained argument to back it.

We are all yet to see that. It's not a big ask. Oh and one of LCs podcasts or PowerPoints will not do the trick this time. Let's see a full prospectus in writing in advance like the SA deal.

@GetReal

Sorry I did not realise you were the company spokes person.

And you point perfectly illustrate the issue, thank you.

Shareholder have not been provided with any of that information. You may be correct but then you may not be.

They stated no dilution required in the SA sale and subsequently.

They then tried to secure an ability to enable the issuing of more shares at the AGM and it was unsuccesful

They have just that in a different way. It may be a brilliant deal? Until we see what the funds are for exactly what value we are trading for that investment and what that investment is going to bring to us shareholders in improved profits etc then why would anyone in their right mind vote for it?

We dont even know the profit break even point for copper volume or LWP testing outcome, all the plant upgrades promised etc etc.

But you carry on trying to paint a rosy picture.

Most shareholders are wise enough by now to recognise that they require transparency and openness from the management and Board. If that is not there then unfortunately we all end up guessing and some see the glass half full, others half empty.

Is that the shareholders fault? Has LC trustable?

Many seem happy to see him walk or even be kicked out.

Personally I remain to be convinced.

@shuvlin

Maybe this maybe that maybe rubbish.

Definitive answers and not dreams lies and promises is what we need.

No SH should be trying to guess or read between lines.

Well said @siboring

What they stated is all written and RNSed.

What they have not explained anywhere is where the 25m was spent?

Why they desperately need 1.5m

It feels like shareholders are being lied to mislead and the non shareholder (minimal) Directors are along with the Board trying to transfer value out to a third party cheaply that they will then be a part of or get a nice return from.

Its time to collectively stop all this nonsense, lies lack of openness and quickly.

As a shareholder I will be voting NO at this point.

We need to all send emails to the BOD complaint and demanding they first deliver what was promised.

Before I vote yes for anything further I want to see a full prospectus and audit trail of where the 25m SA first payments went, where the rest is being spent, exactly what they need this money for (costed) and why showing an evaluation of all the options in detail why this 10m deal is the best and how 10m will increase SHV by x times that. All in writing all in advance of any vote.

Why do we need cash in the first place? Explain that and the SA sale.

And what the SA pre sale actually promised us all.

That now turns out to be absolute lies in terms of enough cash to fund the zambian copper programme

I'm with you @jolly1

No.

They dont need 1.5m or 10m and if they do someone or they both need to go.

The SA sale was to fund and should be funding everything we need including a dividend.

Where do you get this 7.5% figure from? Is that your 10m % calculation of the current mkt cap of say 90 odd million? As the EGM is inferring the permission we would be giving is for up to the 10m.

Where has the 25m been spent so far and what is JM doing about controlling all this for his high salary?

@4everlong

All fair points

As a shareholder when I reluctantly voted for the South Africa sale that there would be no more dilution.

I was then told JM would control funds and LC spending habits.

I was told they would have all the money required for copper in Zambia from the SA sale.

I was even led to believe I might also receive a dividend as there was so much money.

No as you say they are starting to sell/dilute the incredibly valuable assets for very very little cash.

This all seems very wrong. I will definitely be voting voting against this proposal.

I think we should also make our collective voices heard loud and clear.

Just get the copper you have processed like you promised and past the break even point fast.

Don't dilute, dont sell anything cheap or buy any new fantasy, just do what you promised or leave and hand back your shares and 600,000 salary.

@ Valueinvestor

Raised an interesting point

"Hi All,

Does anyone understand JLP's balance sheet post the SA disposal, especially the working cap situation?

Metal trade facilities increased to $43.4m at 1H - does anyone have a good understanding of what happened there?"

If you look at the detailed accounts jlps borrowing has jumped against the loan facilities inspire of the SA sale.

Thats not a concern in itself as I can imagine this recent switch and ramp up has been capital intensive as others are mentioning the changes and improvements.

They will need to ensure the cashflow in matches the increased borrowing though.

Let's hope that as a couple of posters have said the copper break even point is close or has been exceeded. Can anyone tell me what that breakeven throughput number is roughly?

Also given this June Molefe presentation and assuming the mining development work will be quite capital intensive? Where do we think that money will come from? JV Partner? Shares in the Molefe asset and or ore sales? More borrowing? Or ?

The copper production numbers are unlikely at this stage to be sufficient to support further debt or cashflow

The increase i suspect is to pump start the Copper expansion......Roan Sable capital investments, Molefe etc

The $43.4m figure may not indicate distress by itself — it may reflect higher copper throughput ambitions.

But it does mean JLP has become much more sensitive to:

execution delays,

metallurgical performance,

shipment timing,

copper price volatility.

The real question now is whether Zambia reaches sufficient steady-state production fast enough for:

EBITDA conversion,

working-capital unwind,

and self-funding growth.

If they hit the targeted copper scale, these facilities can normalise relative to earnings.

If they miss production guidance, the balance sheet can stay stretched for longer than bulls expect.

The market seems divided between:

“SA disposal unlocks a focused copper growth story” and

“they sold the cash cow and retained the funding burden.”