Member Info for Fukurokuju79

Human sentiment is a funny thing, it can turn on a dime. Within an hour many go from super positive to worried and worse.
Markets don't go straight up. Volume is built by both buys and sells.
The rise started off the back of news, and I've seen no evidence of any coordinated pump that will have generated the volumes traded these last few days.
I'm not here for a long term hold personally, I will admit that, but the initial RNS that triggered this is to be followed up by more next week and an investor presentation (that's when I'll decide what my target is) but it's certainly not just a 2 bag.

It's amazing how it works. You'd think its easier to ride a winning position the reality is the opposite,unless you keep your emotions in check.

Riding a loser people see the opportunity, riding a winner people fear losing the gains. It's almost harder.

IMO it's a wait for the rest of the days trading, then next weeks RNS' and investor conference which will clearly be aimed to drive interest by the company etc

Atb

Exactly, or certainly chuffed that its on the critical path to the very much still alive JV and licence outcomes.
Just let the share price and news do the talking F29.
Deals like this take time, especially with the backdrop of changes (for the better in Zambia).
Very exciting.

#ARCM Very good news that the Zambian Cadastre Department has reopened; the Cadastre department is responsible for the administration of #mining licences in Zambia.
Exciting times ahead for Arc...!

The above being a copy and paste of ARCM tweet.

The c1/c3 costs are very high though. They need to be at least halved tbh.

They are not making profit, as a company.
You can't isolate the operational cost from the rest of the business, hence why the price is so supressed.

The cost to mine doesn't include so many other costs that the company have, you can't just focus on the price to mine. The debt, capital investment, exploration, development and so on

The results today were where I expected. Probably at the higher end. That's good.

Clearly Tim is trying to do his job when he refers to the value of the company, he has to; but given the backdrop of their financial status on no current resolution the mcap is clearly heavily discounted for good reason.

At this stage the investment case in RMM is for someone who IS prepared to lose their capital investment. However it's also a case that if as an investor you are prepared to lose this capital, the returns can be significant.

Tim doesn't seem to state anything about the dilution in the context of his comments of the valuation. It come across as a little bit of an arrogant RNS to me.

It feels he just bangs the drum RMM are undervalued, without addressing or acknowledging the causes and elephants in the room that any investor will want to know. He will be constrained as to what can be said, but he should be saying more.

Atb

You do what you feel you need to F29.
I've not seen any major changes to the cadastre yet. Only been two days so looking forward to that and the news to come.
I'm of the opinion that it's best to let the shareprice and outcomes do the talking against Ella et al.

In good time they won't have much to say tbh. Well, that's my view.

Atb

It would be sad if ARB did go down. It was a crazy ride up from 3-5p buys back in the day.
Im out of touch with where ARB are so I backed out my small re entered position pretty swiftly.

I remember when everyone back in the day when everyone was moaning that ARB used to sell their crypto and not HODL much. They were very pleased when PW changed that. It's interesting how thats now reversed. Clearly aided by the underlying sentiment in crypto.

I suppose their is a case for ARB to be dynamic in its strategy, but equally they shouldn't try to be crypto traders IMO. That was never their model.

I always rated PW, I assume not many do ATM. Back. In the early days the business model was massively different and they were a mining as a service outfit, when they moved to direct mining was a critical step change for the company in a good way.

The crypto market was going berserk and I'd always invested at the lower prices anticipating it should be similar to the lofty valuations seen in the states at the time. So I projected a mcap of 1 billion. Still astounded when it got there.

I hope anyone still in and new investors the best here.

Atb

HFB ...

Would it be 20-24% base and 150-200% rise?

I'd eat my hat if that happens but I'd probably enjoy it anyway lol

Mountain out of a mole hill on this valuable contribution comment I made. Also being taken out of context.

Seis, you're mistaken. I don't like the general tit for tat, and I don't like the agenda some have on this board.

All I am saying is I like to have a variety of views that sit outside, and challenge, my own thinking. It directs alternative research and makes people more rounded. I'd argue it's an important aspect of BBs.

That said I appreciate that not all different opinions are equal, and some are driven by agendas.

Anyway, we don't need to align fully on it but just clarifying my meaning.

I'm confident here. I've done my research and been patient. Arcm have driven this over the time to a position ever so close to a monumental deal with a major. I believe it'll close, with the support of the ministry, the chiefs and the shareholders and as such Im looking forward to the future.

Atb

Pleased I opened a position here at .10 a couple days ago.

Good times. Well done all. Hopefully it continues ahead of news.

Besides surely if we are happy with our investments we can handle someone pointing out potential negatives.

We must all be open to all sides of opinion is my standpoint.

I kind of like that dynamic as while it may not be for the right reasons, it may be what others are thinking and allows discussion on them.
If I think anyone has a relevant point against my investments I'll use it to direct research until I understand it and determine for myself.

I can understand the frustrations though and share them on occasion.

Lol. Was meant to say I think Ella CAN provide a valuable contribution to this board. Which I stand by.

So potential future case rather than past or present, as always phat phingers syndrome.

In fairness Ella can research. Plus clearly has a brain. For me the issue is that they aren't balanced in their thinking, generally doesn't seem to offer reasoning to their argument and also is clearly on the wind up fairly often.

Atb

I see no reason for the terms to change Ella.

Of course all opinion is just opinion. I've already given the various aspects of my reasoning.

Importantly most of our licences are not up for renewal. Including the one considered to contain the best targets. Only two are up for renewal but that's been the case since before the AA deal and the cadastre closed. AA know the areas included as part of the deal and their renewal status and how Zambia work.
Senior officials up to the highest lev know this deal. It's well socialised and supported by minister of mines, chiefs etc.

I see no actual valid reason to think that the ministry of mining will need to make any decisions on our licences, that would require AA and ARCM to revisit the terms to the detriment of ARCM, given they spent so long negotiating them!

I know you get a lot of stick. I think you provide a valuable contribution to the board, but you dont help yourself sometimes.

Anyway have a good day all

Turtle

Can you explain what you mean by this part please...?

'I am happy you have found a friend to converse with though. Please don’t be heart broken when his account disappears again. It’s the same with every other one he has set up in the past. Some would say there is something not right with that behaviour!
Probably a Utd supporter as well ffs!'

Thanks

Hi Turtlewax,

Yes that's all very clear and valid.

The discussion I raised though was more around confirming the current licences and what targets are located within them. As a refresher.

Then I have been able to review the cadastre and see what's up for renewal; assess the mining rules and how they may they apply.

It's important to understand these things before a news release so that any changes can be both interpreted and quantified.

I'm very confident in the deal. I'm also comfortable that the couple up for renewal will be renewed (obviously potentially with some relinquishment, or not).

The key thing for me is this will all have been known to AA, they won't have any ambiguity over the Afrimin area, prior to entering the JV. They know the rules and renewal dates. So the discussion isn't to discredit the JV, it's simply around the licences as a refresher.
The JV is outstanding, the best deal I've seen.

With news due on licences from the ministry/cadastre; JV update / completion and restructuring to support the JV, it's important to me to refresh my awareness.

Always good to sharpen ahead of any RNS.

Atb

Hi Ella

'Small scale mining licences have citizen ownership requirements but small scale exploration licences don't. ARC have a small scale exploration licence.'

- ah yes if course they do, thanks for pointing that out. I'd sieved that detail out of my thought process and it's an important distinction. Even better then.

'The licences are listed in the annual report, the Afrimin licence is not included. The transfer to Afrimin happened 6 months before the previous 19906 licence expired but at a similar
time to 19906 being renewed.'

- Yes, indeed. Personally I'm not worried on this. I can see why some people may want clarity. To me though, if it is or is not still ARCMs would have been a factor discussed as part of the JV. AA will know the details, and have entered into the agreement on that basis, so not a concern for me. Good info though cheers

Atb

Couple of corrections to my post ....so tired...

4. Shareholders may require clarity on Afrimin area however this IMO isn't an issue to the AA deal AA would have known if it is or isn't included as part of the JV agreement prior to announcement in May.

---
Meant to say wasnt...

Out of interest why wouldn't Afrimin be ARCMs? It WASN'T part of the settlement with Mush so I assume the only logical reasoning is that it was part of relinquished area when last renewed?

Ella, Yes am aware the citizen requirements don't apply to large scale, just small scale, which is why I was suggesting possibilities for just the small scale licence. I believe we do have a small scale licence (24958-HQ-SEL) which is active but not due to renewal until sept 2023. But the cadastre defo states its a small scale.

It only seems to me that.

1. The only areas up for renewal are 004&005. I believe renewal on these is highly likely albeit potentially subject to the 50% relinqush requirement. Albeit this may be negotiable and if not we can likely live with that without any major issue against the most prospective targets identified.
2. The small scale licence may require an element of citizen ownership but again not worried about that as it's an enabler to the bigger deal. Albeit I'm not sure if the ministry are looking to retrospectively apply this requirement to existing licences. It may be something only applied at renewals, or new issuance. Our isn't due for another year.
3. The key area (906) isn't due for renewal for two years and that's an important point.
4. Shareholders may require clarity on Afrimin area However this IMO isn't an issue to the AA deal as AA would have if it is or isn't as part of the JV agreement announcement in May.

Out of interest why wouldn't Afrimin be ARCMs? It was part of the settlement with Mush so I assume the only logical reasoning is that it was part of relinquished area when last renewed?

All in all comforting to have the details, dispell myths and understand it all.

Atb

Thanks Seis, so what's the score with the other two small scale licences (see below) as the website is obviously not up to date?

8248-HQ-SML; Small-Scale Exploration License 23243-Q-SEL;

I assume you're referencing giving up half the licence area in relation to the requirement to relinquish 50% at renewal? Which obviously isn't relevant for the ones not up for renewal, or the small scale licences. Clearly I anticipate this to be the case as part of the renewal for the large scale areas, and as you say, without impacting the most prospective areas within the respective licence(s). Nothing new here as it's been known about that requirement.

I think the small scale licences are a bit different in that they have the citizen requirements attributed to them (not applicable to large scale). So may be some jiggery with those as part of the broader deal reorganisation. Possibly give equity % 50% or so away to the chief and local citizens to become shareholders in the smaller scale assets as a condition of the bigger picture deal with AA...(speculation on my part)..

I may be way out but I'm thinking large scale renewal licences will get approved with the relinquish condition met but without impacting the key areas of interest in the JV.
A broader reorganisation of assets and entities making AA the operator and controller and perhaps a citizen based ownership offered for the smaller scale areas.

Any other views?
Be interesting to see how they actually structure it all etc
Atb

Fulmar I'm not concerned with the large scale licences, just uncertain of the application of the rules around small scale licences..
I believe a couple of the five we have a small scale...but struggling to recall / find my notes on what they include etc