Member Info for HarmProf

Bottomsup, adaptation – that’s it. It is disappointing that JMK is unwilling to provide clarity on this board. A brief explanation would save a great deal of time and lead to a much better understanding. Project G, LWP, Chambisini, modular processing units with different capacity and cost, loan to Horizon Limited (Star Tanganika project & Kitwe Project) US$ 19,9, why price increases where not incorporated in the royalty fees, etc. These matters should be addressed at the AGM, and if the majority shareholders are not concerned, then smaller investors must accept that reality. Money talks. Sometimes one wishes to put the CEO hat back on and simply demand clarity 🙂

Why do I want clarity? For a simple reason: to decide whether this is the right time to top up aggressively. If Project G is on track with a clear, detailed plan ahead, it would strongly influence my decision to invest further before the financial year-end. LWP should make progress in 2026, and it will be interesting to see the concentrators finally put to work.

Seis and other expert residents, how much ROM is Project G currently producing? Jubilee committed to develop this mine, and it has the capacity to produce significant ROM. Is the constraint road infrastructure, a shortage of trucks, or logistics to Sable? If production is ongoing, why is there no detailed reporting for Project G? Is this due to resource constraints, or simply a lack of disclosure? It is intriguing that so little information is provided on what appears to be a promising asset, and that this lack of detail is seemingly accepted without question.

Gotreal, could you please point to the official RNS/SENS announcement stating that Project G has been placed on hold or into care and maintenance?

To my knowledge, no such announcement has been made. While power shortages did affect Project G, this was described as a constraint on throughput rather than a suspension, and I would assume mining continued. Jubilee committed to developing the mine, and concentrators were installed on site. It therefore makes little sense to take a producing asset offline or place it into care and maintenance while awaiting Molefe development. At most, production may have been reduced or sequenced during the Sable upgrade. Sable has continued to operate, and the commissioning of the second unit increases capacity rather than limiting it.

HappyDays, Project G: Jubilee 65% ownership they paid this year US$4,4m (an advance). The report doesn't provide the details. The report doesn't provide details about ROM produced (supposed to be from October 2024). I am not clear if the 4,4m is a top up on the previous paid US$2,2m. The develop the mine more money will be required. However, Jubilee should report on this project as standalone project. Same for Molefe, Same for other projects. AGM should address these issues. I guess they acquired a lot of licenses and continue to do so.

What is the progress with : Loan to Horizon Corporation Limited - Star Tanganika Project and Horizon Mining Limited – Kitwe Project Kitwe JV and development agreement (the agreement)?

"Jubilee has secured the rights to approximately 150Mt of copper-containing surface tailings targeted to be upgraded at site and refined at its Sable Refinery in Zambia through a joint operation (JO) with Star Tanganika Limited (Tanganika JO), the mining rights holder. Under the agreement, the parties target to process the tailings to recover copper concentrates for sale into the market. Jubilee was appointed as operator tasked with the financial,

operational and administrative management of all aspects of the project. Jubilee’s Sable Refinery may acquire the copper concentrate at agreed offtake terms to produce copper metal while excess concentrates will be sold in the market. In terms of the Tanganika JO, Jubilee has agreed to advance the equivalent of US$5 million in funding (initial investment) to Tanganika’s owners, Horizon Corporation Limited (Horizon), which investment will be applied in part for the continued project development of a second copper tailings dam of similar size, held by Horizon. The loan bears interest at 6.0% per annum.

Under the Tanganika JO, Braemore will provide all of the operational and capital funding required for the JO and will hold a right to 75.0% of all earnings generated by the JO until such time as 1.5 times of all capital invested by Jubilee (being the aggregate of the Initial Investment and any further funding provided to the JO) has been returned by the JO, whereafter Jubilee’s right to earnings will remain at 60.0% for the life of the JO. Such 1.5 times of capital invested by Jubilee will be interest-bearing. The carrying amount of the loan was calculated based on a discounted cash flow using appropriate discount and interest rates."

and "Jubilee successfully concluded a copper tailings transaction to secure the rights to an additional approximately 115Mt of copper and cobalt-containing surface tailings in Zambia (the tailings). The transaction is in line with Jubilee’s stated strategy to expand operations in Zambia and is in addition to the already approximately 155Mt secured, significantly contributing to future sustained earnings. Jubilee concluded the agreement with Horizon Mining Limited... etc.

Sirboring, thank and Annual Report 2025:

"An amount of US$4.4 million (FY2024: US$ Nil) advanced towards the Company’s Project G acquisition. Project G is being pursued in a JV arrangement similar to Molefe Mine. The Company is in advanced discussions to establish a JV partnership to conduct exploration, resource review and development of its various mining assets"

So, within a few months we will be updated about the licenses obtained and the JV partner for drilling the newly obtained licenses for Project G. That is my take and learning how things are than at Jubilee.

including Project G. Such a partnership agreement will allow Jubilee to focus on its core processing capabilities

while its partner accelerates the implementation of the mining solution and expanded exploration programme.

Jubilee needs a modular processing unit first to ensure consistency and higher grade before moving material to a refinery. The supply line must be properly established to deliver a stable throughput of high-grade, uniform concentrate to the Chambishi refinery, including logistics and transportation. I expect that capital investment, with or without a partner, will be announced first, as it will take several months to reach nameplate production.

Any Chambishi refinery deal should ideally involve minimal upfront capital, with deferred payments structured to be made only from profits or a similar mechanism. The most critical aspect is first achieving stable throughput from the Large Waste Project (LWP). Let us hope the announcement will be made soon how to turn LWP into significant profit.

Chatmandu, Royalties on chrome and PGMs appear volume-based with little price participation. In a cyclical market, this caps upside. Would an upfront US$90m not have been strategically superior to funding copper growth in FY2026? That is my feeling. The reasons for the US$90m spread out over few years is not understand.

Who reported JMK? Sirboring?

Sirboring, Please provide a bit more details regarding this what you said. The bulk of the proceeds will be... etc. Could you provide the details? Which banking facilities must be settled and for how much?

"Jubilee current assets are only 43 million while their current liabilities are 77 million. The bulk of the proceeds will be used to settle banking facilities and the debts to acquire copper ROM."

Eagle, could it be that Jubilee plans a modular unit in the chambishi region? The report does not mention refinery or smelter. if Jubilee were planning to use or acquire a refinery/smelter, it would normally be disclosed explicitly due to materiality. Chambishi is: a processing hub, surrounded by legacy waste dumps, tailings and low-grade material, well connected to power, water and transport (even if constrained).

Lootgaloot, please stop it! Yes, threats with legal action are inappropriate on public forum, adding words not mentioned is misrepresenting, pressing the others to be silenced is bullying, board or finance member must not misuse power, it also could have caused reputational damage. However, you must refrain from accusing an individual without providing supporting facts. Please, this forum should exchange views, challenge assumptions, and scrutinise management. Wishing you a Happy Christmas. 🎄

I will only post when comments distort reality, are twisted to discredit an individual, or when people are treated unfairly. My intention is not to personalise debate, but to help keep discussion constructive and focused. That said, I acknowledge that I often fail in this by responding too frequently, which can be distracting and may cause irritation.

Ultimately, our exchanges should aim to increase shareholder value and encourage new investors to engage in discovering the significant potential of Jubilee Metals. If any of my previous contributions have caused offence, that was not my intention, and I apologise accordingly.

Wishing everyone a Happy Christmas. 🎄

Eagle, I use AI solely to check spelling and grammar — nothing more and nothing less. If you choose to describe my posts as drivel, that is your view. If my comments irritate you, that too is your prerogative. I am an investor, just as you are. I do not respond by dismissing or belittling your contributions, and I would expect the same courtesy in return.

Nevergiveup, please do not attribute statements that were not made, or introduce interpretations designed to stir emotion. The issue is simple: JMK must clarify the matter, and that clarification should be provided publicly on the board, not via private email.

He has already responded publicly on accounting methodology, which is neither material nor contentious where auditors and finance are aligned. The outstanding issue is different and clearly material. JMK must respond and demonstrate respect for the investor community by providing clear, public clarification on this specific issue — nothing more, nothing less. That is my request!

Couerdelion, no — but JMK does need to respond, provide clarity, and ensure that a joint communication strategy is agreed and communicated. That is what shareholders are waiting for.

Seis, you again appear to miss the issue at hand, which concerns the responsibilities that board members and financial managers are required to observe. My comments do not constitute an accusation; they simply highlight the need for reflection and adherence to established corporate and regulatory responsibilities.

A Finance Director should not rely on private emails to address matters that are material to shareholders. Issues relating to resources, production guidance, and operational sustainability must be communicated through appropriate public channels so that all shareholders receive the same information at the same time.

If you wish to escalate matters by spreading disinformation, that is your choice, but my position remains grounded in governance principles and disclosed facts. I am prepared to defend that position if necessary.

Suvlin. A Finance Director has a duty to ensure that material information is disclosed fairly, consistently, and through appropriate public channels. While engaging with shareholders privately is not, in itself, improper, it becomes problematic where those exchanges touch on price-sensitive matters such as resource size, production sustainability, or the credibility of published production targets. In this case, guidance suggesting a ramp-up from 3,500 tpm to 8,500 tpm implies a level of resource confidence that appears at odds with statements indicating only short-term (three- to six-month) production visibility (issued by the partner). That tension should be resolved through formal disclosure, not private clarification. Yes, GLR and Jubilee should issue jointly agreed RNS announcements or formal communiqués. Where production guidance, resource visibility, drilling results, and mine life are concerned, aligned and coordinated disclosure is essential to avoid confusion, mixed messaging, and selective disclosure. Joint communication would provide clarity, ensure regulatory compliance, and allow all shareholders to assess the same information at the same time.

GLR has stated an immediate objective to maintain the current production profile for a further three months, a mid-term six-month aim to replace depleted resources, and a longer-term plan to implement regional reconnaissance drilling to extend the life of mine. In contrast, Jubilee has guided to a ramp-up in production from approximately 3,500 tonnes per month to 8,500 tpm of high-grade copper.

This raises a reasonable question as to whether Jubilee had full visibility on the size and continuity of the high-grade copper reef at Molefe. To date, I have not seen a formal clarification from Jubilee on this point.

JMK, could you please clarify the size of the high-grade copper resource at Molefe and indicate how long it is expected to support production at the targeted 8,500 tpm. This should be addressed publicly rather than by private email, as it is relevant to all shareholders.

Bottomsup and JMK, Just to clarify, the earlier comment was not made by me, but I think it deserves a fair interpretation. Sirboring expressed a shareholder opinion about management’s strategy and communication, based on publicly available financial information. Investor forums exist for this type of discussion, and differing views should be allowed as long as they remain within reasonable boundaries.

Nothing in their message accused anyone of fraud or criminal / corrupt behaviour. Siborings point was that the company did not address NPV, opportunity cost, or FX adjusted valuation when disposing of the SA assets, and that this raises questions about strategic execution and transparency. These are governance concerns, not allegations of wrongdoing.

The reference to ‘dishonest’ was clearly about perceived lack of transparency or inconsistent communication, not an accusation of illegal conduct. It was a single expression of opinion about corporate strategy, not a personal attack.

Legal threat language seems disproportionate in this context. The poster expressed a view grounded in financial reasoning, without malice, and within the normal scope of shareholder debate.

Second issue by Sirboring Management incompetence

Jubilee is welcome to respond if management wishes to demonstrate competence and address why the company was listed among the worst performing South African stocks in 2024, alongside Sasol, Renergen, Montauk Renewables and Gemfields (Daily Investor). The performance on the LSE has also been notably weak.

Investor forums exist for robust debate. Critical opinions about management performance, negative assessments of strategy or execution, and comments regarding value destruction or poor decision making are all considered fair comment when grounded in publicly available financial outcomes.

Jubilee’s recent trends include materially declining margins, a sustained fall in the share price, operational execution weaknesses, and a disposal of the South African assets that many shareholders interpret as a firesale. These factors reasonably lead some investors to view the decisions as strategic missteps.

In this context, statements such as ‘management is incompetent’ fall within the scope of legitimate investor criticism rather than abuse. Analysts, shareholders, and market commentators routinely express similar views when a company’s performance deteriorates. Such comments reflect opinion based on observable results, not allegations of misconduct