Member Info for JuniorLassonde

Hi BS, sharing information which is not inside, with people who see it in the spirit it is given works for me. They do exist and several are large LTH s. There are even larger shareholders who I have zero contact with but know they exist. However on this BB there are some who as I have stated earlier, will use it to bash anthing they see as pro, positive etc. So the next best thing is for folks to go to the source wherever possible - which is actually the best thing most of the time.

This BB can become a melting pot of conspiracy theories and toxicity and I am not willing to play that game with those individuals. I am focused on what the key drivers are for the SP are in a Mining 'Junior' , and I more than happy advocating for additional information from execs to be published, or too seek info from other holders of information if I can, or indeed offer opinions like all of us are entitled to do. If we can write a post on this BB, we can send an Email to the execs or others is my thoughts at present. Persistence will 'eventually' pay off in contacting execs but it needs to be courteous - even if they do not respond - they will likely have read it. We can all see where the weaknesses are in terms of approach to PR and it needs to be addressed. Patience will also pay off here in terms of £return. IMO.

Arnold Schwarzenegger was famously quoted as saying 'I have a rule: no complaining about a situation unless you’re prepared to do something to make it better. If you see a problem and you don’t come to the table with a potential solution, I don’t want to hear your whining about how bad it is. It couldn’t be that bad if it hasn’t motivated you to try to fix it.'

It's a simple quote and that is my approach in all sorts of things - and it woke me up. I am sure others are also of the same mindset. The more folks act in this way, the increased probability of getting that serious multi bagger folks would like.

The following need to be submitted to the Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development:

1. Completed Form I: Include geographical coordinates of the area (fitting the cadastral grid).

2. Company Docs: Certificate of Incorporation, Articles of Association, Certificate of Share Capital, and NRC/passport copies for all shareholders (min 5% Zambian shareholding).

3. Mining Plan: Proposed program for mining operations, including capital investment forecast, estimated ore recovery rate, and treatment/disposal of minerals.

4. Environmental Approvals: Approved Environmental Project Brief (EPB) or Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) from ZEMA.

5. Tax Clearance: Valid certificate from the Zambia Revenue Authority.

6. Land Consent: Proof of title or written consent from the legal occupier or existing mining rights holder.

7. Additional Details: Description of the mineral deposit, proposed duration (up to 10 years), and plans for employment, training, and local business promotion.

8. Application Fee: Non-refundable fee as prescribed.

Several of these e.g. 3 and 4. - I would expect to see on the Galileo Website so that shareholders see a) reduced risk through the EIA approval, and b) can work out the $potential much more easily.

BS, I stated yesterday that offering responses on this BB is usually met with ridicule, assertions that the response is 'made up - a lie' and so on by several on this BB. I doubt that will ever change and that leads to long running arguments, disputes and so on. Best to get the information from the horses mouth whether it be the Cadastre for Botswana, or from contacting GLR. Even this response could lead to the same type of comments and I will not be drawn into those type of discussions. Besides, contacting the execs will be good if lots of people do it.

Three ways.

1. You can look on the Botswana Cadastre: https://portal.miningcadastre.gov.bw/page/MapPublic

2. You can use the contact form - https://galileoresources.com/contact-us/

3. You can send an email - info@galileoresources.com

I have personal Emails which it would not be right to disclose on this forum -gathered by responses to my Emails based on the third approach above where others in GLR have then been copied in on a response.

Cyberia, many on here are in character mode. Each character can delete their posts or Avatar any time they choose. The possibility exists by contacting the admin function. A fresh start is sometimes required. Some get fixated on each others so called 'online personality', others focus on assets, even more are unlikely to comment at all and simply observe this BB dialogue. You can filter. Some have previously sold down significantly like yourself, others have accumulated significantly. The market works but in a low liquidity share that can also be painful or it can be amazing as Chri5p has outlined with his investment in EUA. The real focus needs to be on how do shareholders get the return they anticipated - realistically. CB is here for the journey, he is not going anywhere. So we can either throw stuff at each other all day long which deflects from what should be a shareholder goal - alpha - asymmetrical upside, or we can all go back to trading insults - which will not improve sentiment and will detract from the assets themselves. I think the best way is to focus constructively on what drives a share price upwards, and push the execs to do what is right in each of those share price drivers. You might disagree - and that is your call.

Three licenses that are 100% owned are shown on the https://galileoresources.com/projects-operations/kalahari-copper-belt-project/ website. They are highly prospective, and extremely well placed near additional recent discoveries, mines etc. No other 100% owned GLR license is shown. Galileo will give up licenses it no longer estimates are worth focusing on - and Botswana has a policy to ensure license holders relinquish at renewal points if they have not made sufficient progress etc. Galileo has not provided an RNS to state the new license position so you might want to contact them for an update.

BS, conspiracies do not help. If you want the market to recognise GLR's great assets, and the execs to do what you need them to do, then push them on all fronts. For the execs they need to at a minimum:

1. Demonstrate Management Ownership - Buy shares in the open market immediately and communicate this publicly. This signals confidence - CB has already done it before - and if there is no deal brewing which would prohibit him from buying, then do it again. A serious % ownership from the open market would be well received.

2. Deliver on Promises Consistently - set realistic milestones and hit them every time. Under-promise and over-deliver on exploration results, timelines, and corporate targets. Credibility is everything and the March 2023 presentation dates have not been met and there are no time-lines we can visibly see.

3. Secure Strategic Partnerships - pursue joint ventures, farm-in agreements, or strategic investments from established industry players. This validates the projects with third-party expertise and provides financial backing, dramatically reducing perceived risk. We have done deals with FQ. We need more. Colin is a deal maker. Make deals - weed out the weaker stuff.

4. Enhanced Communication Strategy - provide regular, scheduled updates with clear storytelling about GLR's unique value proposition. Be accessible to investors, participate in conferences, and educate the market about why GLR matters. Communication consistency builds trust. I do not see much evidence from the PR team on this - so improvements should be easy to do in the right hands. The new NED needs to visibly step up. Colin as the front man on PR is getting a bit tired - involve others. When Cooper lemon were involved it at least sounded interesting!

We all need to play the assets not the man. Focus on the key drivers of share price, and the key drivers of sentiment in particular, and avoid wandering off into the usual spats. Everyone included. And this SP might get that 10 bagger that is within the portfolio.

thank you, hd. appreciated.

bs, i'm not running a campaign, but i'll advocate for what's right. we shareholders own this company and there are a few who jointly own far more than colin and the other execs combined. if we unite and push, the door will open, confidence will improve, and we'll help unlock the substantial returns glr's assets promise. the quality of several assets in the portfolio are undeniable, but the board must act decisively. pr executives must deliver measurable progress within three months—or be shown the door. this is not a free lunch. bring in a proven cooper lemon executive to the ned team; their track record securing licenses is clear, and now they can manage on-the-ground stakeholders as we move closer to a deal or production. appoint a dedicated programme manager to drive the luansobe and ka****u open pits forward with focus and urgency. let cb handle deal-making to seal the right partnerships. a sharper focus is now required to get the ball over the try line.

CHRI5P, with respect to PL252/2018 and PL254/2018, these were both released in 2021 in line with the Botswana requirement to relinquish 50% of ground upon license renewal. GLR retained PL253/2018 as it was believed to have the greater copper potential. It should be noted that on PL254 the Copperbelt lithologies are covered by a considerable thickness of younger volcanics, making the license almost impossible to explore according to Ed Slowey, while PL252 was considered marginal to the main strike trends. Also note that the potential NE strike extension of the Cobre TLOU target trends towards PL253. Since then of course BHP have taken an active interest in next door. All good.

Care to be constructive BS? Or are you still focused on being disruptive? Your choice of course. But one might help you and others, while the other will not.

No need to. In probability calculations, there’s no direct equivalent to “compounding” as a standard term.

Probability of that is < 5%.

Well, you have said on multiple occasions that a Kamativi deal is about to have an RNS. I think that there are lots of shareholders who would want to know if there is any more information on this topic. It's a reasonable question on one of the monetizable assets in the portfolio.

You mean Sandfire, not Cobre. Cobre and BHP are the next door neighbours to PL253.

Thank you for your contribution Iky. Any news on Kamativi?

P.S FS. Sandfire have first right of refusal in a sale of the remaining GLR Kalahari owned copper licenses. I doubt Friedland would have given anyone first right of refusal on any of his licenses.

The contract was for Sandfire to spend $Xm within Y years which they did. The Galileo website did show their findings: https://galileoresources.com/projects-operations/kalahari-copper-belt-project/ but now shows the licenses owned by Galileo and not the next steps for Sandfire owned licenses in which we still retain a bonus potential. (I just noticed).

Interestingly GLR points out Sandfire’s Motheo Mine, which has a resource estimate of over 64 Mt of ore graded at 1.0% Cu - compare to the potential at Luansobe Deeps of 60mt+ at approx. 2.5% if CB is right - along strike from Mopani and that puts the huge potential at Luansobe into perspective. The updated website for Kalahari focuses on PL 253 PL039 and PL040 - easy to see why.

There are two aspects.

1. The payout depends on a JORC being produced that meets the criteria for a $80m payout

2. I believe the JORC is across the licenses sold - which helps Galileo for obvious reasons.

To my knowledge Sandfire have yet to produce a JORC on any of the licenses they bought from Galileo. The expiration date for the drilling was met as was the $spent so it would seem. In addition Sandfire, through its subsidiary Tshukudu Exploration (Pty) Ltd, partnered with Cobre Limited (which is now partnered with BHP) to fund and conduct an AGG survey covering multiple licenses, including Galileo’s PL253/2018.

PL 039 and PL040 which are also 100% owned by GLR are even better positioned IMO - and that' saying something!

Hmmm. The presentation is back. Fill your boots. My bad.

The GLR 2023 presentation which was on the website here: https://galileoresources.com/wp-content/uploads/GLR-Presentation-Mar2023.pdf is no longer shown on the website. It did exist, even when the link from the website was removed - you just had to know where to find it. It contained details on likely monetisation time-scales. You might want to contact the company requesting that the presentation is put back up as the current one is from 2020 - 5 years old and that is unacceptable. There was also a presentation to the City which is not up on the website.

The media - https://galileoresources.com/media/ stuff is still there - you can re-listen and reverse engineer what was previously said about dates and priorities - to a point.