Member Info for JimBL

I'm presuming a buy at that price too. Just wondering who and why someone would throw in close to £100k here following the last RNS.

Less jokes now Andee has jumped ship. But he makes a revisit now and again.

Er, this page! KRS share trades above, and click on yesterday.

*showing on yesterdays trades*

Was that a 78 million buy on the 27th??? Brave person sinking close to £100k into this at the present time!

Chortle, chortle... :-)

Man U? Look on the bright side. £1.50 a share would buy you a lot of prawn sandwiches ;-P

1.5p would see me having wet dreams!

Just revising, and maybe becoming somewhat fixated on this issue!
As we know, (DC) mineral resources have not been classified according to any International Reporting Standard / any Standard defined in the AIM Rules for Companies.

Notes from 2020 GM: "Furthermore, an infill drilling campaign planned for Q2 2021 is expected to delineate an additional 100Kt representing five years of JORC compliant ore reserves." 100Kt is the amount to be mined over 5 years, reaching 48,000t in Yr 5 which we are aware of in the suggested production plan. This should/could indicate a far longer mine life than 5 years as the BOD are hoping for (potentially 60 years+ at 48kt per year).

AIM requires the use of a recognised measurement standard when updating the resource available. 'Question again remains why, having first referred to a JORC, have they now decided on obtaining the Canadian equivalent instead - for a US resource - when the AIM rules also recognise the US SME standard?
Moreover, the SME standard seems to be a necessity for use and submission to the US SEC for a US company (which FI LLC is) - unless its under the joint process allowed by a Canadian owner company. This process is not one shared with the AIM market.

From what I can gather so far, FRU Directors have no identifiable mining experience or backgrounds.

So, I'm pondering the whole approach and it throws up these most logical answers (at least to me):
1. Setting up for a possible TO. Maybe that's the most likely reason for FRU's investment in us - it's paying for the drilling required for the resource measurement and we are the ones with mining expertise?
2. Setting up for a possible future JV but with FRU as the majority holder - hence a focus on satisfying Canadian market requirements. Our mining expertise would once again come in most useful with their potential acquirement of the Arkansas phosphate resource too.

Either way, I think something is most definitely going on which is not a requirement for us to just obtain a JORC on DC.

I don't know about any prior relationships. They (new Directors) only acquired the Uranium asset (as in the FRU name change from Karam ) which is exploratory, late last September.

Anyhow, the point being, as Falcon isle is a US LLC, with US organic certification, it is most logical that it would ordinarily file a US mineral reserves report (SME). "All SEC reporting companies, other than those who file under the Canada-U.S. Multijurisdictional Disclosure System (MJDS), will be required to comply with the new rules". SEC reporting of the mineral reserves is now mandatory as far as I understand it.

MJDS? Ah, well - "The Multijurisdictional Disclosure System allows eligible Canadian companies to offer securities in the U.S. using a prospectus that is largely prepared to meet Canadian disclosure requirements."

I don't think it's that, Mark.

I've gone through their paperwork. https://www.sedar.com/DisplayCompanyDocuments.do?lang=EN&issuerNo=00046287

FUR was Karam Minerals until only last November. They held/hold nothing but two speculative staked assets (Black Duck 1&2) in British Columbia. There's no mention of any meaningful prior geo lab work being undertaken (or anything other than minor site investigations) and they had only $27k cash on hand in their last accounts. They were going nowhere fast.

Changed management, undertook a raising and changed name to FU in January of this year. Undertook another raising and from that, an option to acquire the Arkansas (US) situated project of Southwind Corporation, that being Phosphate and REM. The asset is not JORC'd or any equivalent in the US.
Notably: "In addition to the share payments, the company shall be obligated to incur minimum work expenditures of not less than $3 million USD within 12 months from the completion of the NI 43-101 Report."

If you apply the same logic to ourselves, then you can only presume a NI 43-101 for DC is at their behest with an eye on a possible future TO of an operational mine? Or, we intend to sell a major stake in a JV with them as the majority holders on the Canadian markets.

There's no other reason I can figure why we, as an AIM listed company with a mine in the US under SEC regulations would need to be acquiring Canadian regulatory compliance for our mineral resource - unless it intends to end up on the Canadian markets under Canadian company ownership.

More food for thought for you all, which I also asked/posted over on ADVFN:

"National Instrument 43-101 (the "NI 43-101" or the "NI") is a national instrument for the Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects within Canada. The Instrument is a codified set of rules and guidelines for reporting and displaying information related to mineral properties owned by, or explored by, companies which report these results on stock exchanges within Canada."

Obviously, DC is not within Canada. It's not owned by a Canadian company. FI/KRS do not function on Canadian stock exchanges.

Interesting. Thanks for the number crunching! Maybe I'll just stick them back in the box buried in my garden then ;-)

Of.

Looks like Shard valued on 100%- or was it a typo?

Shard Valuation Diamond Creek
Discount rate 8%
NPV (100% project) US$25.9m (£19.9m)
Keras attributable NPV US$13.2m (£10.2m)
IRR 105% 481%
Shares out post transaction 4,866,007,851
Implied NPV per share to Keras (p/sh) 0.21p

About 4.9 billion. Value £18.3 mil (combined 'projects') and 0.38 sp. Of course, now close to double that number of shares in issue though we do own 100% of DC - and it's more than debatable if Nayega even remains a going concern.

And as for the Canadian 'JORC' it just gets more baffling - unless the obvious answer is the reason.

The US SEC brought in it's own revised rules, effective January 2021. https://www.dorsey.com/newsresources/publications/client-alerts/2019/02/new-mining-disclosure-rules-2019

If Falcon Isle remains a private company through which we are mining and owning DC, then these would apply to us, both as a US company and as a foreign one filing the necessary papers.

I really can't see this any other way than we are being set up for a possible TO of DC/FI.

For the sake of discussion - what sp would we place on a TO with a larger defined resource?

EP - I get your thought process. But at a time we need to be and should be selling product (in a fertiliser / phosphate demanding world market), why have we become interested instead in spending money on defining more in the ground?

More digging around.

FU: Description of Business and Overview

"The Company’s principal business activities include the acquisition and exploration of mineral property assets. As at December 31, 2021, the Company had not yet determined whether the Company’s mineral property asset contains ore reserves that are economically recoverable. The recoverability of amount shown for exploration and evaluation asset is dependent upon the discovery of economically recoverable reserves, confirmation of the Company’s interest in the underlying mineral claims, the ability of the Company to obtain the necessary financing to complete the development of and the future profitable production from the property or realizing proceeds from its disposition."

Acquired Southwind in march:

FIRST URANIUM RESOURCES LTD. TO ACQUIRE SOUTHWIND CORPORATION
PHOSPHATE AND RARE EARTH EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT IN
CENTRAL UNITED STATES
? High grade surface Phosphate deposit highly enriched with heavy Rare Earth elements
located in Arkansas
? Two strategic and critical products with strong demand growth
? Phosphate grade is at top end of US producing phosphates
? REE enrichment is amongst the highest in USGS database
? Above 20 worldwide REE projects in terms of Volume
? Above 15 worldwide projects in terms of Grade
? Proximity to domestic markets with rail export and transport infrastructure

The project characteristics are based on US Geological Survey data and are not contained in a NI
43-101 report. The references to grade and project size and scope are therefore provided for context
only and should not be relied upon by readers in assessing the technical merit of the project.
Paul Barrett, CEO of Southwind, said "We are delighted to be partnering with First Uranium on
this exciting project, with combined potential for two vital commodity streams - phosphates and
rare earths. First Uranium’s participation will accelerate development of this near-surface
stratiform deposit, situated in the heart of the US Midwest, which has excellent potential to feed
into the agricultural and high-tech metals sectors, both of which are experiencing sustained and
long-term growth in feedstock demand."

So, a strategic partner with their initial investment - or - a TO coming once resource size is confirmed???

I think I'm at the same conclusion.
Makes no sense for a UK listed company, with a mine in the US, to be using the Canadian system to define it's US resource. Nor for KRS to suddenly decide it needs to that, other than the fact a Canadian investor (acquiring companies) has just came onboard.

Likewise on Togo. Seriously considering bailing out at long last. 'Do what Andee did and put the remaining funds into CAI now they have dipped slightly.