Member Info for Gallmat

Feels ok deck chair :)

I am not that bothered about the company that bid. They must know they have resources to make a mine and source the upfront payment which sounds bigger than i thought.

Fingers crossed :), i only want $150m

Upfront payment is part of process. Limited to 500 crore...which is $77.5m !!.

I am not sure how much is due in our case. Bit given Bhukia is super huge, they royalty rate. Could it be this is the size of an initial upfront payment

The centre has notified changes to the Mineral auction rules which cap the upfront payment at Rs 500 crore while also baring affiliates from bidding for the same block. Bids placed by affiliates of companies who have explored a block being auctioned will be made public to ensure a level playing field for other bidders. According to the Mineral (Auction) Amendment Rules, 2024, a bidder shall submit only one bid in an auction of a mineral block and no affiliate of a bidder shall submit another one in the same auction. An affiliate has been defined as a person (or company) controlled by another bidder in the auction.

So deck chair i think you are right. 1200 × 7.3m oz.

Seems too high. If it is true then someone thinks bhukia was outstanding which can only be positive for us later

I think we really need more definitions. But from general past discussions i think this is correct.

In the past when i diacussed auctions 20pct might have come up and i thought wow. This 60pct number i was not expecting at all.

I am hoping that when we get general updates or presentation, maybe the company could point us to formal documents that explain the auction pro ess in india.

No matter what the result is India completed fhe auction.

The pdf confirms they are paying a royalty of 63%.

If i remember you do not blindly bid, each person bids and it gets higher and higher like ebay.

If so we can assume some big companies also bid a high %.

Even a 40% royalty of 2000USD gold. That is f*^## huge!.

For all we know the 63pct carries some corporation tax offset need more info.

I could not be happier.

The price seems high, it implies the bigger companies also bid high. Our asset has gone through a process to take it off us.

What is not to love :)

Ed, that is the best suggestion today.

That went nowhere i think.

I am just waiting for more details.

This is another step out of the way

One more idea, this went to a company with smaller market cap. Now harder to argue our small company coule not do it. Seems company size is not huge factor.

Wait for the details before you judge. What is the % royalty that is what gov will get.

They might have rich guy in background. If they cannot do it, surely it moves down the chain

This is so positive. Make an argument of how our asset has not been taken! :)

Well.

Looks like the asset is gone. Which is very nice :)

Where did you see that? Link?

I do believe that the kalaka JV might have a good chance. MB seems to be very keen that people make decisions with clear info ( good CEO).

If he states possible deal i think it is more fact than fluff. Not a booster like lots of CEOs

Agree. I think the company can say they are very comfortable with broker estimates.

When releasing the NOA they can also explain why it is delayed in detail. With reasonable commentary everyone can be more comfortable

Guys. I also chatted to CEO.

Not much to add beyond what prof said.

He emphasised that everything is for a reason and i believe he wants to also get moving.

given noa is available. dilution is known to be **** as is waiting.

why would mb wait if nothing was potentially happening.

the only logical conclusions are

a) some engagement is happening

b) lawyers asked for a longer waiting period so it did not %&&& up the case. last thing you want is to start a process then 1yr later be told you did not engage and have another 6m+!

We delayed issuong the NOA due to engagement is my reading, as a result we did placing at lower level. The lower placing was the cost of waiting.

Now that we paid that price why the rush to issue NOA early july?. We then took the cost for no benefit.

Let the engagement come to an end. If it fails ok,

Hold on

MB said NOA first to start process without claim

Deliver the claim size when the arbitration court says it is required.

No way are we waiting 6m to issue NOA

Thanks. Just a typo

Going to try and ignore the comments. MB had Fraskens work for 1 yr before we had litigation financing, has spun out 1 asset and is trying to spin out another.

Given what he has been given i think he is doing fine.

Funding for opex was my biggest annoyance here but i came in wide eyed and expecting it so cannot complain.

My hope is the kalaka restructuring gives some relief to cashflow and when we inevitably issue our claim we will have a rerate.

I am factoring in another 20pct dilution. But hopefully and other money required will be obtained from a higher share price

Have you spoken to him?

It was clear a raising could come i flagged it months ago.

Are you unhappy with

A) obtaining litigation financing ( non dilutive)

B) spinning out cascades for earn in ( non dilutive)

C) efforts to spin out kalaka ( non dilutive).

If you look at the balance sheet and see we need fo cover opex what do you want him to do exactly, we have early stage exploration assets?

The only gripe is delaying the next stage of process and issuing the claim amount. I am not dancing on tables about that, but willing to give him benefit of doubt for few months