Member Info for Jiving

Thats interesting 99, so November is clearly out contrary to the RNS from less than 2 months ago, and we still some 3 months left before we 'have' to hold an AGM.

That's what I mean 99: they usually give us 3-4 weeks notice which means if they follow approx the same notice period, the AGM cannot now be "... held in November 2023." as indicated in September. Indeed they need to inform us shortly if its going to be held by end December. Its likely nothing, but given the state of play....

Driving: I also think its most likely finalising the Glen loan - either extension or repayment via equity. They need that clarifying before an AGM.

Wonder why we haven't heard about this, given we are now at 21 November 2023. From 29 Sept RNS:

"Annual General Meeting to be held in November 2023, with the requisite notice to be sent to shareholders in due course."

Extrader, I also hope Glen are looking for the maximum upfront cash payout from their ZIOC stake. IMO that is why their offtake agreement was put into place, previously when they have sold out an equity stake they have retained a small royalty - the same formula hopefully applies here. Indeed, perhaps a royalty stake should apply to all ZIOC shareholders, as the best method of giving us a low risk future exposure to the Zanaga mine.

It's good to read some sceptical opinions from Bear/Mitch, as its been too easy to get overexcited with industry developments in the ME & elsewhere. Until a year ago it looked like the only way out of our predicament was an EPP, which had clearly been the main focus for ZIOC over the last 5-6 years.

But 'something' changed a year ago in November 2022, and the emphasis in all communications since has been on the full scale 12/30m project, with EPP relegated to an afterthought. There have been three substantial developments since then which indicate something substantial is afoot & indeed possibly drawing to a close. The first, of course is the incorporation of the Glencore mine stake into a minority position in ZIOC. This in itself seems to have been in order to specifically attract in a strategic investor, begging the question whether this hurried restructuring was itself in response to a serious approach.

Second, was the Chinese EPC costings that are crucial to establishing a current project valuation (NPV) that would be the basis for either a JV or a full buyout negotiations. Again it’s the timing that counts here - why now - unless there was a clear rationale for using those figures with one or more strategic investors? Note these are for full the 12m/30m project not any form of EPP & indeed the recent presentation suggests that 60m pa is possible.

Finally, the fact management, BOD & consultants are cashing in their options/salary swaps now (& in a hurry!) before the next AGM where we should get a final share count authorised by shareholders - in practice Glencore & Elphick. This is a crucial issue for those involved, and it’s the timing that suggests to me, they can see ‘something’ on the near horizon requiring immediate action. Any strategic investor buying in (JV) of doing a full buyout needs those precise share figures.

BTW the company was admitted to the Stock Exchange 13 years ago today - 18.11.2010.

POSCO & Nippon Steel are indeed key players in the global steel industry (including green steel & Gulf interests). As massive iron ore importers, they are presumably as interested as other global players in securing their own quality ore supplies. We know Japanese interests have examined Zanaga in the past (apparently Mitsui), the 7 November RNS is the notice to all parties to prepare their final bids for the project.

You could have something there Soup, negative postings over WE prior to buying Mon morning.

Just blipped above 0.30.

The dream scenario for us of course is competing bids from the Saudis & the Chinese. I am happy with 'anybody' so I literally dont care who it is, but of course competing bidders are better than a single bidder & a consortium would essentially be a single bidder.

Whatever is going on with the share price is irritating but if its Shard it will be for a purpose. Goldman is now seeing an iron ore deficit, which is a good backdrop fro final talks:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/10/goldman-sachs-sees-clear-deficit-of-iron-ore-for-the-rest-of-the-year.html

It's also a China focussed presentation - message could be its time for other interested parties (Saudis; UAE; Qatar) to show their hand or by default it will go to the Chinese.

But ALB1 surely you are not deceiving the board again, I mean why buy at an average of 0.48 when you are expecting 0.25?

Your post Sunday: "0.25p next ...... Then the delist."

Nibj, Glen could wait indeed & its a minute amount, but they also have a repayment date on the loan facility of 31 December 2023, and could have been making a play for receiving shares rather than cash in repayment - ie similar to the recent share swap we saw for management/consultants. We may find out the answer in any AGM announcement, which we need soon to get everything tidied up & voted on prior to any deal.

Agree it is very likely to be the Shard facility, but what do they need the funds for? The most obvious need is to repay the Glencore loan by year end, which would only happen if they were not able to get it rolled over. Frankly, if they dropped some more news they could have got the share price up a lot higher than 8p & an equity sale price of 6.50p. But we are in the final stages of getting a deal, so they must do whatever they need to tidy up the balance sheet prior to finalising a transaction. I have expected more dilution & use a final share capital of 660 million for my calculations.

Driving not sure why but I cant see or access the 'Geological report', is this for the Zanaga project?

Hi Extrader, not sure if this is what you are referring to regarding 'cranking up quality' but I think its very important from the perspective of project valuation ie the end product is intended to be value added iron ore pellet feed using latest Chinese tech. From the 3 July RNS:

"Chinese EPC Partner possesses specific, specialised, design and construction expertise ..........as well as iron ore pellet feed concentrate projects similar to the Zanaga Project."

"Phase 2 - Processing technology application study

§ Chinese EPC Partner possesses proprietary new processing technology for iron ore processing, with the potential to provide further capital and operating cost savings beyond the results of the FS Update.

§ The application of this processing technology to the iron ore from the Zanaga Project is planned to undergo technical assessment as initial results from the FS Update are received in the coming months."

Its not your place MM to determine which board, I or any other poster chooses to post on LSE. I will post wherever I like on LSE on any subject I see as relevant to my investments - it's categorically none of your business.

As you are in the unwanted advice business here's some back: why don't you set up your own Telegram group for ZIOC where you control subjects & participants, it could be your own megalomaniac empire.

Did you have any reasons you could explain for your opinion on the article, or none you are capable of putting into words? As ever the best you can do is quote an irrelevant piece about Putin - pitiful but to be expected.

If the Saudi's are potential purchasers, we need to get the cheque signed whilst they are still flush & able to pay. This is a more sceptical view of the boom, with this comment on the current ME war & possible implications:

"This is why behind the PowerPoints and the panels MBS has been telephoning everyone he can to try to stop the Israel-Hamas war from spreading into what could easily become a full-blown war between Iran and the United States fought right over the Gulf. You can keep the war out of the convention centre, but you can’t keep Saudi Arabia out of the Middle East. And nobody knows this better than MBS."

https://unherd.com/2023/10/saudi-arabias-empire-of-sand/

Whoops, should read "..want the development/operation of a vast new MINE left under ZIOC...."

Exactly Ex, neither do I. I seriously cannot believe any major strategic player would want the development/operation of a vast new hands left under ZIOC BOD/management even with additional directors & top level management hires. Surely they would want to involve a global mining partner like say Vale - whom all the main players already have various relationships/partnerships with (Saudis, UAE, Chinese).

So if you dont need/want ZIOC in charge of the project what purpose is served allowing them to keep a sizeable stake going forward, when everyone knows the intention is to attempt to sell that stake at enhanced NPV once the project is developed? Especially if the strategic investors need to entice Vale in with an element of 'carry'. Far more likely a strategic partner would seek complete ownership/control of Zanaga & move ahead with their own development/operator partner - I would hope that would be at a reasonable takeover price & surely all ZIOC shareholders would welcome any bid price north of 100p. Glencore have turned offtake agreements into a low annual royalty payment in other cases where they have sold their equity stake, thus maintaining a small future participation in the ongoing mine's operations.

Indeed maybe that might be the way forward for ZIOC as well - we get a healthy share buyout price plus a holding in a ZIOC Royalty vehicle that owns a few % of Zanaga's future production which is then passed through to shareholders as a dividend. You could even leave it listed - the BP Prudhoe Bay Royalty Trust was listed/traded for many years in the US.

MM, none of us know which direction the deal is going to go, and whilst I would prefer a complete buyout I am frankly happy with any deal that gets the mine finally developed. Anything is way better than nothing & sooner is better than later, particularly in the current world. A straight forward bid (which would IMO likely be agreed in advance by a bidder & the major shareholders) is straightforward. A JV with ZIOC retaining a minority stake is also fine - those like me who dont want to sit through development can exit at an enhanced market price & those that do want to see it through can stay on board.