Member Info for FreeBuffett

….. anyone has full access to this it would be interesting to know if this is at all relevant to PFP. Could of course be nothing to do with PFP, but an intriguing headline … https://www.iareporter.com/articles/bit-tribunal-declines-mozambiques-second-request-to-suspend-proceedings-in-light-of-parallel-commercial-arbitration/

….. PFP are working hard to find a solution. No doubt also that whoever they have in frame for either buying IMM (including the TZM) or someone wanting to take up the litigation of the BIT case also wants it kept quite. So I’d guess discussions are cover by NDA or similar. The diligence required for these move needs to be deep and considered. So whilst I’m semi-frustrated with the current time frame l’d rather have a strong positive RNS that several inconclusive ones.

… considering the market volatility of the past couple of week and the nose dive of some AIM shares. Perhaps the promise of PFPs future puts it lower down the divest list than others.

Listened to this and now much clearer in reasoning behind the sale. Brings value forward by at least a decade.

My guess, and it is a guess, £30m max but staged payments as mine developed and start making money. Remember PFP want to start a new Avenue of business so I think they will accept a low off initially with added value to come later.

I also do not recall the reference to Cameroon,
" Welcome
Pathfinder Minerals is listed on the AIM market of the London Stock Exchange (AIM:PFP).

The company has two wholly owned subsidiaries: IM Minerals Ltd and Pathfinder Battery Commodities Ltd.

IM Minerals is seeking to explore and develop heavy mineral sands such as ilmenite, rutile and zircon in countries that include Mozambique and Cameroon.

Pathfinder Battery Commodities reflects the evolved strategy of the company to complement Pathfinder’s original heavy mineral sands focus. The company believes battery metals represent a considerable opportunity for the business, enabling access to the renewable energy, electric vehicle, and other green-technology sectors. "

Thanks Investor01, interesting, incorporated 20th May but details on website. Clear indication of future direction for the non-license/BIT/IMM as stated in previous RNS. Wonder when PFP might say something official?

Should see the 2021 finals and AGM resolutions this month. Hopefully something forward looking but will give cash position.

@THE_CHAIN .... that slide also caught my eye, it did even suggest a figure towards 90p. The interesting point for me is the confidence (business case confidence not presentation confidence) in which this slide was presented. Given the many multiples these figures represents to the current SP it is perhaps interesting to consider what might have been discussed a board level for a CEO to so openly suggest such future SP movements. There is obviously no fear in stating their case openly. My feeling is that Zephyr and Colin are very confident that these valuation can be achieved and should be reflected in the SP in due course.

..... why Richard Jennings took only 1,1666,666 of the 0.5p warrants when 12,833,334 were on offer, 11,666,668 being extended to next may. Could it have been that it wouldn't have taken too much more dilution for Klaus Eckhof's holding to go below 3% ? Perhaps Klaus's TR1 status is significant in some way, he is after all a person on note in the sector and therefore boost PFP profile.

.... that Africa Changcheng Mining holdings Ltd (aka Africa Great Wall) sold its substantial holding in Northern Minerals Limited for Aus$ 24.25m (c.£13.77m) on 05/05/22. Purchaser is Yuxiao Fund Pte Ltd. Yuxiao Wu is a directors of both companies. So whilst this looks like a transfer of the holding it does leave Africa Great Wall with a wedge. Africa Great Wall of course is a major partner in TZM Resources. Just saying.

Quite happy with those two. Explains a couple of strange transaction 4th May.

Working on a simplistic view that warrants priced below the bid will be taken up and those above will not, it could be said that the three tranches expiring on 11 May bring in £64k (0.5p) and miss £865k (1.25p & 1.5p). Also simplistically it is perhaps viewed negatively that any take-up of warrants means dilution for current holders, a total 73.8m expire on 11th which could have been a dilution of a little under circa 13.9%. Now these are meaningless figures to some extent but at the time the warrants were issued I would suggest that there was some thought that future warrant take up would provide working capital, especially valuable for a company with no revenue. The last half year report in September '21 stated circa £606k in cash, so with what I believe to be a circa 300k per year working capital requirement this looks like enough to get to Sept '23 or thereabouts. So £64k is not really going to alter the situation in any positive way and the question of where future working capital is coming from remains as nothing is as yet visible. Of course a rabbit might miraculously appear out on a hat in the next 16 months making us all squillionaires, Hausfeld (appointed Nov 2020) might at last get their hands on something against the UK court award, a buyer for IMM could appear ... but on a more realistic time frame it would appear that a further issue will be needed in the near time. I'm relatively relaxed about a dilution as a see the provision of working capital to be more important at this stage, additionally I feel this is exactly why TZM is playing a long game.

May 4th be with us !

Like many others I'm not enjoying this drop in SP and I don't think that the CPR warrant a drop, indeed I think that perhaps a modest rise is in order. So why the drop, I can only guess but it would appear to me that the CPR has been built up as being the mega news that short term holders where looking to for a quick buck with expectation of figures way north of those in the CPR. The CPR is good news but there is a consistency in it, and in CG's interview, that goes back to the test drill and core sample days in that its all about the mix. This will only become clear when drilling starts, and CH states if the mix is right (more oily, less gassy) we're talking many multiple of the CPR figures. Previous drills in the same area are quoted by CH as being more oily, so 16-2 is a bit of an anomaly by comparison, this was clear at the test drill stage. So LTHs will need the patience that is a characteristic of such people. I'm confident in CHs leadership, he's genuine and I think is not overplaying his hand at this stage. The primary reason for the CPR delay I feel is gaining certainty of a baseline and being sure to not over play the resource given the mix uncertainty.

Market makers sending out some clear messages there ... hold on to your hats !!!!!!!!;P

Today was more interesting than most, slight understatement maybe. The board are walking quite a tightrope here, they have to get the i's and t's sorted beyond reproach or the BIT could be holed below the water line. Similarly, no one will contemplate buying IMM if the same is true, nor will a litigator take on the case. For me it's clear that there's much going on behind the scenes, this RNS shows that, and therefore patience is required, albeit difficult to be so at times.

I think you are right Dip. I like the development that to sell IMM requires shareholder agreement so when PFP announce this with the prospect of a buyer its far stronger than announcing a litigator prepared for a no win no fee Any IMM purchaser will be solely focused on pursuing the claim which will pressure Moz Gov and TZM.

@Bugzy .....not the last throw of the dice, far from it, but an interesting refocus on the thorny issue of a way out for TZM. Settling against the background of a BIT perhaps is perhaps seen a negative whereas buying IMM is a positive acquisition for them. What I like is the imaginative processes PFP is tabling to facilitate agreement whilst maintaining the pressure. Likewise identifying Moz Gov asset pressure points such as the LNG.

Any thoughts of how the CPR will be viewed if gas is a large (or larger than expected/anticipated) content of Paradox ? Going back to the days of grant funding for research drilling of 16-2 there has been some questions regarding what the mix will be and it appears to me that more gas and less oil is not viewed as positively.