Member Info for holyroller

Mention of the 5p raising is at the bottom of the 19th June RNS:

Second Closing of Subscription

With the anticipated acquisitions of La Escondida and La Norteña, it is the Company's intention to undertake a second closing of the Subscription announced on 23 May 2025 for the balance of the £0.5m, following the successful first closing to raise £1.0m announced on 17 June 2025. This second closing will be at 5 pence per ordinary share of 1 pence each ("Ordinary Shares"). It is expected that this second closing of the Subscription will be made on or before July 11, 2025. The Company will provide further updates as appropriate.

https://irtools.co.uk/79/story/471fa7a0-7441-431c-8bb2-7ec898c2176c

The great thing about Ajax is that the market cap is so tight and there are so few shares in issue that it goes up significantly on just a small amount of buying pressure.

When you consider that almost 65% of the company is in the hands of just 10 people then there really is not much of a free float to go about. After the publish the JORC report this time next year I would expect a value of £40 million minimum - so this is at least a 10 bagger from here over the next 12 months, possibly more.

In the video he said Q1 or Q2 2026 for the JORC report

Typo is my previous post it should have said raising £1 million not £1.5 million. Sorry

Financially, they appear to be in good shape. After listing in 2022 with £1.2M raised, they’ve remained lean, still holding around £600K post-acquisition. They’ve now raised £1M at a 33% premium (4p/share) to fund the Eureka drill program, with 15% of that raise coming from the board. Insiders and family already control around 40% of the company, which is a great sign of alignment.

Interestingly, they’ve moved their listing from the Main Market to AQUIS. That might sound like a downgrade at first glance, but it actually makes sense. The main market now requires a minimum £30M market cap, which Ajax didn’t want to dilute shareholders (and presumably board control) to meet. Instead, they’re focused on building that valuation organically by delivering results—particularly the upcoming MRE. AQUIS is ok for growth-focused small caps and should give them the flexibility they need to scale properly. However, I would expect them to look to move to, or at least dual list with, a larger market as soon as the jorc report is out. If my estimation of a value of £30 million is right then there is every probability that they may just move straight back to the main market.

Finally, the team behind Ajax is strong. The board includes Michael Hutchinson, a former director of the London Metals Exchange, and both executive directors are hands-on, with plans to oversee operations on the ground in Argentina. This isn’t a passive team—they're actively pushing the project forward.

All things considered, Ajax has acquired a historically rich asset with major upside potential, in a revitalising jurisdiction, for pennies on the dollar. They’re fully funded through the next 12 months, have a tight share structure, and a clear plan to deliver value. For those looking at the junior mining space, this could be one to watch closely.

As always, DYOR—but I’m definitely in.

I thought I'd post this here as well as the old board.

Just finished going through the recent video on the Ajax website, and I have to say—this company looks like a seriously undervalued opportunity in the copper-gold junior space.

Their acquisition of the Eureka project in Argentina could be transformational. They secured the asset for just $170,000, despite it previously costing the former owner between $2.6M and $4M.

The purchase price was very cheap but even more striking, is that Eureka was once valued at up to $81M in an Edison Investment Research report back in 2010—based on lower commodity prices than today. The resource estimates, while not yet JORC-compliant, suggest 620,000 tonnes of copper (worth over $5 billion) and 52,000 ounces of gold (around $150 million at current prices).

Eureka isn’t some hypothetical project either—it’s a historically producing mine, that has easy road access and mineralisation close to surface, meaning Ajax can pursue open-pit mining rather than more complex underground methods. That dramatically shortens the timeline to production and lowers upfront costs.

What’s particularly encouraging is Ajax’s plan to confirm the resource with a full JORC-compliant Mineral Resource Estimate by early 2026. They’ve already mapped out a 5,500m drill program, with Phase 1 (3,000m) starting later this year. On top of that, they’ve conditionally acquired two additional licences—Mina Las Econdida 1 and 2—which expand their landholding by 30% and could increase the resource size further.

Obviously, once they get a full Jorc report done then the value of the project, and the shares, will increase exponentially – and this is going to be over less than a years time. By my reckoning the value should go up to at least £30 million just on the jorc report which is a massive return from the 3p it is today.

The jurisdiction is also worth noting. Argentina under Javier Milei has taken a pro-mining turn, making it a far more attractive location for exploration than it was even a few years ago. Ajax seems to have timed their entry perfectly—while other companies are still cautious, they’ve moved early and secured a high-potential project at a fraction of its true value.

But it actually makes sense. The main market now requires a minimum £30M market cap, which Ajax didn’t want to dilute shareholders (and presumably board control) to meet. Instead, they’re focused on building that valuation organically by delivering results—particularly the upcoming MRE. AQUIS is ok for growth-focused small caps and should give them the flexibility they need to scale properly. However, I would expect them to look to move to, or at least dual list with, a larger market as soon as the jorc report is out. If my estimation of a value of £30 million is right then there is every probability that they may just move straight back to the main market.

Finally, the team behind Ajax is strong. The board includes Michael Hutchinson, a former director of the London Metals Exchange, and both executive directors are hands-on, with plans to oversee operations on the ground in Argentina. This isn’t a passive team—they're actively pushing the project forward.

All things considered, Ajax has acquired a historically rich asset with major upside potential, in a revitalising jurisdiction, for pennies on the dollar. They’re fully funded through the next 12 months, have a tight share structure, and a clear plan to deliver value. For those looking at the junior mining space, this could be one to watch closely.

As always, DYOR—but I’m definitely in.

Just finished going through the recent video on the Ajax website, and I have to say—this company looks like a seriously undervalued opportunity in the copper-gold junior space.

Their acquisition of the Eureka project in Argentina could be transformational. They secured the asset for just $170,000, despite it previously costing the former owner between $2.6M and $4M.

The purchase price was very cheap but even more striking, is that Eureka was once valued at up to $81M in an Edison Investment Research report back in 2010—based on lower commodity prices than today. The resource estimates, while not yet JORC-compliant, suggest 620,000 tonnes of copper (worth over $5 billion) and 52,000 ounces of gold (around $150 million at current prices).

Eureka isn’t some hypothetical project either—it’s a historically producing mine, that has easy road access and mineralisation close to surface, meaning Ajax can pursue open-pit mining rather than more complex underground methods. That dramatically shortens the timeline to production and lowers upfront costs.

What’s particularly encouraging is Ajax’s plan to confirm the resource with a full JORC-compliant Mineral Resource Estimate by early 2026. They’ve already mapped out a 5,500m drill program, with Phase 1 (3,000m) starting later this year. On top of that, they’ve conditionally acquired two additional licences—Mina Las Econdida 1 and 2—which expand their landholding by 30% and could increase the resource size further.

Obviously, once they get a full Jorc report done then the value of the project, and the shares, will increase exponentially – and this is going to be over less than a years time. By my reckoning the value should go up to at least £30 million just on the jorc report which is a massive return from the 3p it is today.

The jurisdiction is also worth noting. Argentina under Javier Milei has taken a pro-mining turn, making it a far more attractive location for exploration than it was even a few years ago. Ajax seems to have timed their entry perfectly—while other companies are still cautious, they’ve moved early and secured a high-potential project at a fraction of its true value.

Financially, they appear to be in good shape. After listing in 2022 with £1.2M raised, they’ve remained lean, still holding around £600K post-acquisition. They’re now raising £1.5M at a 33% premium (4p/share) to fund the Eureka drill program, with 15% of that raise coming from the board. Insiders and family already control around 40% of the company, which is a great sign of alignment.

Interestingly, they’ve moved their listing from the Main Market to AQUIS. That might sound like a downgrade at first glance, but it actually makes sense. The main market now requires a minimum £30M market cap, which Ajax didn’t want to dilute shareholders (and presumably board control) to meet. Instead, they’re focused on building that valuation organically by delivering results

Hmm, looks like this could be a project with quite interesting potential. I will do some research into it and come back with my thoughts.

Nigel Somerville of S***e Prophets posted a very interesting article on this over the weekend. I am not a member but have been sent is as a link: https://maroon-hadria-97.tiiny.site/

If what he claims is true then Gneiss have arranged for Scirocco to loan £1.2 million to EAG in order that EAG can buy GGL. So EAG get the whole of GGL 100% funded by Scirocco but Scirocco only get a 50% interest.

I warned about the Gneiss Energy involvment in SCIR over a year ago, but it seem that things just from bad to worse here. Luckily I have now sold out most of my stake at a significant loss, but I don't think that this lot will ever play fair with us long-suffering shareholders. J Fitzpatrick and Gneiss Energy are just here to bleed SCIR dry.

The good news is that one of the leaders of the aggressive hostile takeover mob who wanted to try and get their hands on Block have sold out. Rather than being as has been described here: “ a big concern”, GP Jersey is an organisation run by the 27/28 year old Fraser Lang to invest his father’s money. In the past he used it to buy a 15% stake in Union Jack Oil and Gas between July 2017 and Oct 2018) and was rewarded with a non-exec appointment on 4/12/2018. However, interestingly, he resigned from this position just seven months later on 10/06/2019 and less than a month after this resignation on 11/07/2019, his stake was announced to have dropped to zero.

It seems a real parallel with what has happened at Block though in our case his attempt to help engineer a hostile takeover of the company would only have been rewarded with another non-exec position if the Scottish banditos had been successful in their takeover attempt and, thanksfully, they were not.

So to answer the question about whether a major shareholder selling out for a loss is a good thing – it most certainly is if that major shareholder is a 27 year old trustafarian who was trying to engender a hostile takeover of the company that was firmly rejected by shareholders. Even their exist was bad for shareholders as they were the ones selling into the rise that followed the announcement of the successful JKT-01Z drill.

What I think is of more interest and deserves an investigation, is why this TR1 was only released on Friday when, thanks to some of the eagle-eyed investors on here, we all knew back in February that they had sold out then as their names no longer appeared on the Block Energy significant shareholders section of the website. It’s nice to see that they have finally admitted that they have sold out but I am pretty certain that waiting nearly 2 months to announce it is not what the regulators would expect them to do. Still at least they are gone now.

The spud must be coming soon, but although it is frustrating that there has been so much time between the last well and the new sidetrack, it is more important to get the sidetrack done right than to get the sidetrack done quickly.

As I have said time and again on this forum, the next sidetrack is the most important drill in the history of the company. At the moment the market does not believe for certain the company’s claims that they have unlocked the geology of the reservoir. This suspicion that after several failures the last drill could have been a fluke is reflected in the share price failing to get over the hill of the share dump that was carried out by Frazer Lang when he sold into the rise after the drill success.

However, if the next sidetrack is completed successfully then all doubts will be banished and the company will have proved beyond doubt that they know how to commercialise the reservoir. As soon as this happens then the share-price will rocket and debt financing for future wells will be an option. So we need to get it right.

That, said, it has been a long time now, so I expect the sidetrack to commence very soon.

Spudsoil – I agree with much of what you said in your Saturday comments. However, I do not think that you go far enough in your challenges and expectations for the company From my point of view:

1. Block the corporate entity should be aiming for not just stability of production but also an increase in production rates in order to take advantage of the high oil-price environment which I do agree should be in place for the next couple of years.

2. I think that the aims that you have been putting forwards (that of drilling eight sidetracks over two years) are far too conservative and I think that following such a conservative path will completely miss the major opportunity.

As shareholders we were denied the rise in share price that we would normally have expected after the successful JKT-01Z well was announced in January because of massive selling-into-the-rise that happened as soon as this news was released. While we have not been provided with a TR1 release to confirm exactly who the seller is, the evidence from the Block Energy significant shareholders list does point to the fact that this would have been by Frazer Lang whose GP Jersey shareholding no longer appears there.

Regardless of who was doing the share dumping, we should not blind ourselves to the fact that the wider market is still clearly dubious as to whether or not the company have truly unlocked the reservoir geology or not. If the wider market was convinced then the company’s future would be seen as secure and so the GP Jersey sales would just have been swallowed up and the price would have continued to rise. The fact that it did not shows that there is still work for Block to do in this area.

This is what makes the next drill so important. Get it right and we show the market that the geology has been unlocked and will get a massive re-rate on the whole company. In my opinion, Block should drill the next sidetrack at the earliest available opportunity. We know that we are fully funded for this drill and if we deliver success then we will convince the market that we finally know what we are doing out there.

This would put us in a position where we were able to go out and get debt finance for a multi-well drilling programme which could be paid for out of the two sidetracks (JKT1 and the one still to be drilled). We would then have the capability to drill 5-6 wells this year without needing each and every one of them to be a success and as long as those ones that were successful flowed at approx 300 bopd then the company would very quickly start to generate very significant income which could be used to service even more debt etc.

We absolutely do not need a farm-in partner as this would just be giving away revenue that should be 100% ours, but the only way we can prove this to the market is to successfully drill the next sidetrack. Once this is done then a successful future for the company is unlocked for all of us.

I think that there is validity to both what bigboffer says and what those who disagree with him sya.
Clearly on an operating level the current high prices for both oil and gas make a huge difference to Block Energy. With oil and gas prices high then the oil and gas that we sell generates Block more money and gives more in the corporate kitty to cover expenses. Essentially the prices going up from (for example) $50 per barrel to $100 per barrel is exactly the same as production going up from 320 bopd to 640bopd.
To pretend that the change in O&G price does not make a difference to Block Energy the corporate entity is simply nonsense. Higher oil prices mean better operating margins and more money in the bank and this is good for any business.

At first glance, even from a shareholder’s point of view it seems that Boffer does not have a point as the share price initially increased from 0.8 to 1.2p over the course of the first two weeks of serious oil price rises and it began to sink down again from March 9th oil peak to drop back to where it is today. So it would appear that it is following the oil price trend pretty much step for step.

However, when you take a step back and look at the wider picture then what Boffer is saying does make sense. Back in September when the oil price was around $74 the share price of Block was 2.4p and so his point that oil prices nearly doubled while the share price halved is absolutely correct.

As Boffer points out this is because the 2.4p share price was prior to the failed drill and although we have had a successful sidetrack since then and the company claim to have unlocked the reservoir geology, the market is clearly waiting for the prove that this is the case with a second successful sidetrack in a row. In short the market is waiting to eb convinced that the second sidetrtack was not a fluke and that Block have indeed unlocked the reservoir geology. If we can prove that we have then the market will re-rate the company and the share price will rocket. Basically, the market doesn't trust the company... YET.

So, , the rise in oil price does help the company but it does not really help the share price. The thing that will do this is the drilling of a successful sidetrack and the first stage of that is to announce the target and the spud date. Hopefully this should be any time soon as Georgia has been unaffected by Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Make no mistake about it, the next drill either makes or breaks the company. The oil price just provides a turbo-boost to the consequences.

GLA.

Some positive thoughts:

1. Oil price is sky high.
2. Our production seems stable
3. The seller looks like they have gone away.
4. The Scottish contingent look like they have given up their takeover bid.
5. We are fully funded for the next sidetrack.
6. The company maintains that they have unlocked the geology of the reservoir.
7. After the huge mess that they have made of Ukrains there is no chance of the Russians invading Georgia.
8. If we are successful with the drilling of the next sidetrack then we will be able to fund future drills out of debt.
9. Q1 results are coming out in 30 days and we should be strating to drill the next sidetrack in that time period too.
10. We still have all the rest of the Schlumberger acreage to explore.

Any finally, the sky is blue and the sun is out.

Good luck everybody. I feel that our time is coming.

The Russians invaded Ukraine,
And now they are at it again,
But Georgia’s in order,
It shares just one border,
And the oil is pouring like rain.

However, this brings up the original point that radx made which is: “what is to stop the Scottish mob doing exactly the same (i.e. selling into the likely rise to ameliorate it) if the next side-track is indeed successful?”

In light of all of other points that I have made above I think that the answer is that there is nothing to stop them doing this and in fact, if they have given up on their takeover attempt the it is almost inevitable that they will do this and sell into any price rise. However, there are a number of factors that I think would mitigate this issue after a second successful sidetrack were drilled.

Firstly: a successful second sidetrack will start the Block share price on a significant upward trajectory as it would prove that the company have, as they claim, unlocked the reservoir geology and that the JKT-0Z1 drill was not just a fluke. This would remove a lot of uncertainty about the future and would show the wider market that future drills would be likely to be successful.

Secondly, and more importantly, a successful drill this would also set the company up with a new price floor and then income necessary to be able to introduce debt-funding to fund future wells. This would be a total game changer for Block. It may also be enough to get some of the Scottish to hold on for higher prices.

Assuming that the next successful sidetrack drilled flowed at approx. 300 bopd then withj prices of approx. $94 per barrel and costs of $24 per barrel (as per the 7th April 2020 RNS) then Block are making $7.6 million per year from that well alone. This is more than enough to finance a 4 year debt facility of $20 million that would fund a 5-10 well drilling program. Even at a coupon of 15% the single nexr sidetrack would fund all the debt requirements and if 40% of the next 10 drills were successful then we would look at generating a further 1,200 bopd which would be $30 million per year. A 60% strike rate would be 1,800 bopd and would generate $45 million per annum.

So, as I have said for a while now, it is my belief that the long-term success of the company all comes down to the success of the next sidetrack. If the company can make it deliver at 300bopd and therefore prove that they have cracked the geology of the reservoir then this will give them a 40% strike rate in wells so far (2 of 5) and this success rate will be more than enough to allow a debt financing program that can be rolled over year on year as more wells are drilled. The upside from this will be so significant that the sale of all of the Scottish contingent’s shares would be absorbed. There is no denying that it would hold back the price slightly in the short-term but there should be so much good news from that point onwards that the share will not be held back for long even if they all got rid of all their shares.

Radx – sorry for the long delay in getting back to you. In answer to your question about “what is to stop the Scottish mob doing exactly the same (i.e. selling into the likely rise to ameliorate it) if the next side-track is indeed successful?”

That is a good question and there is no single answer to it as the answer depends on what has happened on one key question and this question is “who is selling out”. I agree 100% that it is the Scottish mob who are selling but the big question is are people selling individually or are they acting in concert?

If there had been a TR1 issued then it would be easy to work this out as we would know the name of who had sold their shares. However, given that there has been no TR1 released we are forced to simply extrapolate from the available date who has sold and what is going on. From my research into the Scottish contingent last year there are a number of facts that might be pertinent to this:

• Alistair Ferguson first issued a TR1 showing that he owned 5.89% of the company in 8/4/2019 when the share price was approximately 9p.
• Jon Fitzpatrick issued a TR1 for 3.8% of the company on 1/11/2019 when the share price was 7p.
• GP Jersey issued a TR1 showing that he owned 3% of the company on 19/08/2020 when the share price was 3.05p and another showing he owned 5.02% ON 9/4/2021 when the share price was 2.8p

What this data shows us is that whoever has been selling at these prices is showing an enormous loss compared to their initial investment. GP Jersey would have been selling for a loss of between 50%-60% of their initial investment while Jon Fitzpatrick would be selling at an 84% loss and Alistair Ferguson would be selling at an 87.5% loss.

The obvious guess of who would be selling at the moment would lend itself to be GP Jersey as their loss (while still substantial) would be the smallest and the easiest to write off in order to make another investment, whereas the loss for the others would be much larger. However, the absence of a TR1 lends itself against the theory that it is just GP Jersey selling as the sales have been significant enough that if they had been selling on their own then they would have passed the 3% threshold and would have been legally obliged to issue a TR1 to inform the market of this.

Considering that there has been no TR1 issued it seems that the Scottish contingent are selling their shares in concert. This would heavily suggest that they have given up their attempt to take over the company and would be a great thing for us shareholders as they would have been terrible custodians of our assets and money.

However, this is not to excuse the fact that under his watch the share-price has gone in the wrong direction. It may not be 100% his fault but as the leader and CEO he does have to take 100% of the blame for it. He was absolutely on his last chance when he drilled JKT-01Z and I was not alone in saying at the stime that if that drill had been a failure then I would have wanted him out. However, since it appears to have been a success then he has earned the chance to drill the next well and prove that the company really have unlocked the geology.

If this proves to be the case and the company can now start to drill many different wells that all deliver 300 odd bopd then I am happy that the share price will go in the right direction and we will be led by a CEO who has learned from his previous experiences and will not make the same mistakes again. He is by no means perfect but as long as he delivers successful drills going forwards I can forgive the sins of the past and I think that the wider market will too.

He is definitely a less bad option than letting the Scottish mob taking over the company would have been.

Rxdav – looking at your previous posts I assume that by the elephant in the room you are talking about Paul Haywood and the idea that the company would be much more successful with somebody else at the helm?

The way I see it is that essentially the reputations of Haywood the individual and Block the company are fairly inseparable and are both tarred by the same brush of past failures. But equally the reputations of both can be rehabilitated by drilling successful wells and driving the share price upwards.

Personally, I think that any CEO’s reputation would have suffered with the various well failures that Block have delivered to shareholders over the last few years – no matter who they were and no matter how they behaved. This is just the nature of the game. If a CEO supervises the share price going up then he is a genius and If it goes down he is an ******** no matter who they are or what they did. However, great success and great failure is it is in most instances clearly not completely the CEO’s fault. In Haywood’s case he is not a geologist who decided exactly where and how to drill the various wells, he is merely the man who signed them off. He is not innocent of failure but it is a team failure not that of a single individual.

Where he can be reasonably critiqued as an individual is in the hype that he built up around WR-16AZ (the gusher to dribble drill) as this undoubtedly caused many investors to get locked in at high prices that have not yet recovered. However, even here I can see a degree of mitigation for him. He clearly didn’t know that the flow rates were going to decline that dramatically and nor did anyone else at the company. If the well had continued to flow at the rates that were originally announced then we would all have been praising him for the hype and the rocket that the put under the share price. It is only retrospectively that anyone could really see what a disaster he made of this drill – it was certainly not clear at the time.

Since that time though I think that he appears to have learned his lesson. He (and the company) are much more cautious about their public statements and there is much more fact and much less hype – with all of the good and bad that goes with that. His reputation has also IMO been deliberately (and at times unfairly) damaged externally by the various articles published by Malky at the behest of the Scottish mob during their two year takeover attempt. These articles were deliberately designed to paint him as incompetent and responsible for all of the companies ills and for all of us at some point or another they have succeeded.