Member Info for Jiving

Also noteworthy that the 5.25p discounted share price, was very close to the management/BOD share issuance price of 5.29p back in October 2023.

Right hadnt seen the 7.31 RNS. Right so they bought in at 5.25p, hey I would like to buy in at that price as well, my last purchases were unfortunately at the market price.

Now Glencore have been given a freeby in the form of heavily discounted shares - will they extend the remaining loan amount of some $444k another 3/6 months?

We knew they had that in the bank after Fridays RNS. Its exactly what they should be doing in the period prior to signing a deal, running the balance down to the minimum level to avoid dilution.

The latest RNS gives us nothing important we didnt already know, basically just a summary of where we stand. My heart sank when I read yet another study had been commissioned, I really hoped the 2024 FS was the end of endless studies.

Shaun where did you see that Glencore & Elphick were taking shares?

To emphasise how the 2024 facility is intended simply to meet ongoing company expenses, note the sales/proceeds are going to be paid weekly/fortnightly to ZIOC by SMC. You really cant fine tune financing any more than that - market disruption minimalised & shareholder dilution minimalised. Literally the week its no longer needed it stops.

"The 2024 ESA would provide for regular payments to be made by SMC to ZIOC following any sales of Subscription Shares.

· Payments under the 2024 First Tranche would be made weekly and then fortnightly."

Thats what the funding RNS is about. Absolutely nothing unexpected has happened, the company is dealing with its monthly expenses & its remaining loan in the best, least dilutive way possible. Its literally 2+2=4 time, as I anticipated some 4 weeks ago.

1. The company has monthly outgoings it has to pay. It has no revenue so it has to meet all costs via equity placings or go bankrupt.

2. The company has a loan that needs to be repaid or rolled over. The only way of doing that is through an equity sale in the market via T3 or a direct equity sale to Glencore covering the outstanding amount.

3. Future monthly costs need to be met, & again lacking any revenue, the only way is via equity placing. If the existing T3 is used to repay the loan, then a new facility needed to be signed. This also proves the company can meet its financial obligations in the coming year. It does not mean that all the facility is needed, see below.

If the company sells 12m shares of T3 @ 6p in proceeds they raise GBP720k or $914k. If the loan is repaid in full @ $740k that leaves just under $200k for monthly expenses. So note that 78% of the proceeds of T3 would go towards repaying the remaining Glencore loan. I calculated that of T1+2 some 55% of the proceeds went to repay the previous portions of the Glencore loan. So if we take all 3 tranches of the 36m shares issued, around 63% of the proceeds will have gone to repaying the loan & only some 37% towards monthly expenses. (If Glencore accept shares in repayment those shares will of course not come onto the market, but all shareholders will still be diluted)

So looking forward this means provided monthly expenses remain at the current level the company only has to issue/sell just over 1/3 of the amount of shares it sold in the last 3 tranches to pay expenses. That is just over 1m per month. So there is no reality behind the notion of an extra 36m flooding the market any time soon, the whole point of this mechanism is to drip feed shares onto the market only when they are needed and to have the ability to stop dilution the instant a deal is signed. It is a smart, minimally dilutive method of financing a company like ZIOC that has no revenue.

Thats a very interesting observation ATG. So they have a discussion that they don't share with the rest of us, but continually seek to shut down any discussion we have here on LSE that doesn't suit their purposes.

ATG, well with annual results due they have an opportunity to unbox themselves.

Its not just PIs that need reassuring, its strategic investors as well.

Extrader. First off, the great short term news is in last hour we have had some half million trades over 7p.

Regarding Marty & developmental/ESG spiel. This was a possibility I commented at length on 21 June in aftermath of Marty's podcast. I view/read some 20-30 fund raising pitches from CAN mining juniors p.a & I have never ever seen such emphasis on development/ESG in a presentation. Assuming Marty is pitching his spiel at his audience his initial target may well be developmental/ESG finance for FEER, possibly separate from eventual Stage 1 finance. Or, as per the complicated IPO arrangement with Xstrata, possibly giving the financiers of FEER an option on financing Stage 1?

Marty is clearly as CEO taking over corporate presentations to potential investors and delivering interviews, both previously undertaken by AT. But AT remains on board as IR/PR and yesterdays RNS for example was signed off by AT. It would surely make sense for AT to be still primarily responsible for relations with Proactive & the press? I certainly agree the 'total mess' is not an AT mess. But what was the purpose behind the sudden flurry of activity, really hoping the annual results announcement provides some answers.

Agree completely it was not 'made up' but came from a trusted 'insider'. Hence the repercussions.

There was a clear boundary crossed in 'insider's' revelations that were not present in Marty's. IMO Marty went to the limit of what could be stated outside of an RNS but 'insider' went beyond that. Nomads exist as regulator substitutes to guide/control their clients & police their actions & statements.

ATG, one explanation for what happened was that the 'insider' simply jumped the gun & spelt out what he 'expected' to happen ahead of it actually happening. The RNS then spells out that nothing formal has taken place as of now. The annual results provide an early opportunity for the company to put things straight, its time they did.

This summarises the role of the Nomad vis the self-regulation of AIM companies like ZIOC:

"Regulation on AIM is outsourced to nominee advisors, known as “nomads”. These private companies are paid by the listed companies they regulate to act as advisers, carry out due diligence on each new listed company and provide guidance and oversight throughout a company’s listing."

There would be no reason for the company to publish a retraction RNS if the 'insider' mentioned in the Mail was not a proven company insider. The Nomad obviously keeps an eye on 'his' companies share price, & the reason (if any) behind it. Here there is a clear connection with the Mail article (released at 16.32, ie deliberately after close, on Monday). That article, written by a Proactive employee, is based around the views of a stated 'insider'. The Nomad would likely query the Company about whether this was specifically a 'Zanaga insider', if the answer was 'yes' a brutal retraction RNS was demanded - hence the speed of reaction.

Like others I am bewildered by the events of the last week. We get minimal input from the company, then we suddenly get two detailed communications within a week, just before the annual results. Both Elphick & AT (ex JP Morgan, who 'never' make these errors) are longstanding corporate finance professionals who know the rules & the boundaries: yet we end up in this situation with the humiliating retraction RNS. It was clearly for a purpose but what?

The Mail column 'SMALL CAP IDEA' is a regular feature, so if they describe someone as an 'insider', IMO that is likely an accurate description. Also note the author: IAN LYALL AT PROACTIVE INVESTORS FOR THISISMONEY.CO.UK

Just trying to figure out how we can suddenly get so many contradictory statements in a week, after years of essentially nothingness. How about this for a scenario - the Marty podcast was supposed to be a positive appetiser for the forthcoming results, but it backfired & was taken negatively by the market. They attempted to rectify this with an 'insider' plug to the Mail a couple of days later. The market reacted positively but the Nomad was appalled & demanded an official retraction, hence the 17.38 emergency after hours RNS?

Brutal, was this initiated by the Nomad after reading the Mail article?

Spot of the year Beardozer!

The second attempt at influencing investor sentiment in less than a week after Marty's podcast fell flat. Marty is very much a mining guy so the ‘insider’ is likely someone from the PR/IR side, maybe AT tapping into PI’s @ Mail?

Interesting that the general drift of regular’s research/analysis is largely confirmed. It might be a buy-in or a buyout, both being considered. Also we are in a competitive situation, which we know is what is needed to drive the price higher. No mention of FEER specifically here but ‘deal is expected within a few months’ is the firmest target we have had since the missed Q1 strategic investor deadline.

An observation from that link:

"The most likely time for a major to purchase a junior mining company is after Feasibility Studies are complete but before construction is underway. This is the optimum time for a major company to acquire the project for the best value/risk ratio."

'5 countries', good spot. That relationship with the investor base needs enhancing with a detailed explanation next week of whats going on.

Hi Extrader

My use of the word 'concern' may have been misunderstood as being different from your 'interest'. As illustrated below both are close synonyms for the other:

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/concern

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/interest

Hopefully we will find out next week what is actually going on, which may or may not be what we think/hope is going on. A lot of interesting thoughts & possibilities thrown around & discussed today - exactly what a share discussion board should be about.