Member Info for HarChris

It’s not so much optimism and faith, it’s that steps *have* been put into place to ramp up production and there has been signs that things could soon be on the up, magnified by a perfect backdrop.

I obviously agree that management have built up expectation before and utterly missed the boat so I don’t think it’s a given but I’ve bought in heavily with the expectation of a big step up in production a month or two after initiating production in the new pit (ie May/June). And in some sense it’s up to the geology gods now so I’m just crossing my fingers like everyone else that the higher grade comes through.

We aren’t overdue news we were promised, that’s all I’m pointing out. We need the next update to be positive so it makes sense to push it back a bit so they can report on the effect of the transition of pit.

Why the same sort of message each day? We will get an update sometime soon, whether this week or next. Posts like yours seem desperate.

It’ll probably keep going down on news, but will creep up in coming days to 20s so any fall back on positive flow news will see SP well above where we are today.

We await the next gold pour, probably this week. What other news are you expecting?

And if we assume that this gold environment isn't a flash in the pan and is instead a reaction to global uncertainty that isn't likely to change for a while it gives GRL a mighty long time to see the operational steps they have been taking show through in terms of production output.

Worth remembering that now at around just 375 ounces p/m GRL can wash their face with every additional ounce up to the 1000 ounce target being cash generative / able to pay down the gold loan to AIMS. That's a lot of cash at the top end.

It finished bang on your 31.1p pivot price.

I hope it's correct as to Cosmen's involvement as it would mean they certainly are here for the end game still.

I think what’s most useful to see how prices compare over different timeframes - for example unless the trend for helium price appreciation falters we should expect the revenues forecasted for HEX. Here’s what grok has to say:

### Price Comparison Summary

- 2015: ~$100–$150/mcf (bulk liquid helium), $7–$10/liter (end-user, research labs).

- 2018: $279.95/mcf (BLM auction, up 135% from 2017), $20–$30/liter (labs).

- 2022: ~$375/mcf (global bulk), $450/mcf (China imports), $39–$55/liter (U.S. labs), $14/m³ (USGS).

- 2023: $95,120 USD/MT (U.S. bulk, December), $68/liter (Australia labs).

- 2024: $92,627–$93,840 USD/MT (India/UAE, Q4), with regional declines due to oversupply but 8–10% year-on-year increases.

- 2025: $92,710 USD/MT (India, Q1), slight U.S. increases, with potential future softening as new supply comes online.

### Long-Term Trend

Over the ten-year period, helium prices have increased significantly, with a CAGR of approximately 8% for bulk liquid helium (2002–2022). Prices in 2025 are roughly 2–3 times higher than in 2015 for end-users (e.g., $39–$55/liter vs. $7–$10/liter for labs) and have risen 50–100% for bulk helium (e.g., $375/mcf in 2022 vs. $150/mcf in 2015). While recent oversupply in 2024 caused temporary price drops in some regions, the long-term trend remains upward due to supply inelasticity and growing demand. Future price relief depends on new production from Russia and Qatar, but geopolitical risks and distribution challenges may sustain volatility.

Absolutely, in no way should anyone be unaware or dismissive of the downside risk, it's real and there is always a chance of it going to zero. Having said that last summer shares traded consistently between 1.3p and 1.7p despite still being at 250 (troy) ounces per month with a $2500/oz gold price and hence burning through any cash raised quickly alongside the very serious risk attached to the $3.2m CLN deadline.

In comparison we've been seeing ~450 troy ounces @ $3300/oz and + the CLN sorted with minimal dilution (imagine if GRL went placing route and ended up issuing 450m shares at sub 1p).

Imo GRL is in the best shape it's been in since 2022 when the SP was trading at 7p-9p per share (halve it as share count was exactly half back then).

Sorry Kaeren, I didn't see your reply which was a more thorough version of mine.

There is no doubt that Heights isn’t dumping like they have done in previous quarters. Obviously there are numerous possible reasons but unless it’s simply that they they are more wary with 9m shares not to crater the share price and ultimately lose out then it has to be deemed a positive. Perhaps a buyer has been found after all and the transaction is going to take place all in one go off-book?

How is your first point a risk vis a vis investing at 15p? A risk of only seeing 3X - 5X returns?

I guess it’s a risk I’m willing to take.

Thanks. I find it fascinating that just as GRL starts to turn the corner many appear to be choosing now to sell or are losing hope. This to me is the dream turnaround play - you’ve got a company that has done its exploring and reached production off the back of other investor’s money at a much higher share price, they have already experienced all the teething problems that initial production often throws up, they have been right at the brink but a combination of solid renegotiations, improving operations and (a huge chunk of) luck have given them a second go at this and yet the share price remains heavily suggestive of ultimate failure.

600k ounces that is hopefully going to be upgraded to 1m means a potential revenue of billions. One would think GRL were weighed down by an insurmountable debt but it’s actually well below $10m whilst they generate cash as we speak with very low costs and near term potential to generate enough cash to wipe out the debt in a matter of months.

'One thing we haven't had yet since the results is any broker down grades, or up grades !!!!'

________

As far as i'm aware only Jefferies have commented and they held their target at 90p...

I suspect we'll see a range of about 30p-40p for many months now with little to nothing to break the cycle.

I'm hoping this settles some nerves.

Going back to some of my recent posts the September interims (up to June 30th) will show a radically improved balance sheet. £2.8m/$3.2m of debt will be reduced from the conversion at 3.25p of the loan note and its accrued interest. $300k debt cleared from the conditional subscription last October and $600k from a recent issue to AIMS for interest on 250 troy ounces of gold loan. And now as long as current production is at least maintained cash will be building up in the accounts/gold being paid to AIMS to reduce the last major outstanding debt.

Not out of the woods just yet but the turnaround is well and truly on supported by this gold environment.

Well I hope the decision to integrate the lithium circuit into the main plant at the expense of the ore sorters is worth the spike in royalty and therefore higher costs that will be seen in the next update because if there isn’t something to show for it by late June (ie a lithium off take deal) all we are going to see is a further rise in AISC and significant cash burn at a time when they should be making hay.

A rise in royalty from 5.13% to 9.63% will be noticeable.

There was roughly 260k ounces still to be mined from the original mine life plan as of 31st Dec 2024 so I assume now we’ll see ~90k ounces a year for 25/26/27. And then extension would be needed to continue at Segilola.

Yeah some of the debate on here is just ridiculous. 'Priced in.' How can production be 'priced in' at £23m when it would mean three wells producing $12m pre tax cash flow straight off the bat with a target of 3 - 5 more production wells a year later?

If production is reached this summer without any hitches the share price will be at least halfway to that 75p NPV attributed to Rudyard. The major milestones will be construction commencing as well as off-take agreements. And we know there's a decent chance that Rudyard could be expanded well beyond the number that gives us that 75p NPV + that doesn't include Ingomar or any new prospects that will inevitably materialise with such cash flows.