Member Info for Laverda

Yes Clapa

KMUK has and had more than sufficient funds to pay this.

Either Hainan did not account for this so want it done this way so they get their cash back quickly or our port changes and higher nameplate means that we could use a greater amount of the cash that KMUK hold than Hainan and Kodal are comfortable with and decided to provide more funds, firstly this way and it takes care of that payment.

Weird everyone wants to talk about that rather than we may just have two or three payments in a year with these big shipments which is what I am getting my head around.

If the amount of additional capital to ship larger shipments and the time taken to hit this higher plant tonnage output is estimated at 15m dollars hence the loan payment, then it has created a lot of unnecessary discussion.

Worse if they think it will cost 30m if they are doing huge shipments, but thought they would do 15m now and 15m later as it will all go off into crazy discussions.

We may just be doing two shipments or three per year from this port.

That may tie in well with the combined output from the combination of the DMS and flotation later on.

Northtrader, yes I am astonished at the reaction. The JV may include loan facility agreements we do not know.

There are two changes from BFS and funds dropping and now, we are using Abidjan which is more likely to be larger ships. I don't know why we switched ports, maybe the development is behind time or it is cheaper.

The second thing is the plant manufacturers gave a different nameplate tonnage last year after plant purchase, a higher tonnage, but we were not told how this is achievable or if other mines are already hitting the tonnage.

Both of these factors will extend the time until first payment, although the payment will be larger from the bigger shipment.

Bernard is so tight and careful with our cash, he would not take a large loan facility and only use some of it, it is how he is.

Kodal plc has not taken a loan.

Like I said people who panic and are doom mongers, who are not trolls but investors are crazy putting themselves through AIM.

Can you believe this is a sweet one, big heap of stock worth more than their loan.

Elcobble the stock pile will be paid for by cashflow money allocated for this purpose from KMUK, it will be replenished when the payments return.

However we were not chasing 125,000 to 130,000 tonnes until sometime in 2024 when the plant fabricators said the nameplate can be raised.

That extra time to get there will require additional cash.

Agree re loan purposes Rotter.

My only concern is this new 125,000 to 130,000 tonnes becomes the goal a figure given by the fabricators after we purchased the plant.

115,000 to 125,000 was fine with me.

Yes Fly I agree.

The loan matches the stock value effectively factored loan.

Smart - Burkina has just done a deal with Russia - brave I thought.

A few months time it may have been ok.

Onlyking and others who think it is rubbish you should go, I would never stay invested in a share I thought was a dog.

I pulled my money from companies where I didn't like the way they were going and both times it was the right move.

Investors should run with their own views and thoughts not other people's and certainly not on a chat board.

I am with Naylor on this one, from start to finish put a ruler through the share price chart and it is pretty much perfect in what a long term shareholder would want to see.

And we aren't hitting nameplate and receiving any revenue yet.

Share price in-between on this share is quite steady for an AIM share.

Yes I understand that BFD.

However my point is people investing 4-8 years ago looking for a post lithium profit were, gold, gold lithium then sale.

When the plan changed in 2022, at the moment we are still pre lithium, no gold gold valuation never mind sale.

We are further advanced in time, reduced holding with JV but haven't got our gold valuations yet.

So currently SC, MM really don't matter. (Unless trading)

However the people making the comments say that they don't trade.

BFD, I don't see the issue. If we were on plan A we would still be developing Fatou for sale, Nielle would have been sold and we would not be as advanced with Bougouni.

Now it is flipped over we got a great deal on Bougouni and are just weeks from total completion.

However we have two Goldfields not yet valued. We are in no worse a time situation and in a better financial position as we still have 100% of two Goldfields.

I struggle with people's views over the timeframes they talk about and say they have held - not disputing their holding.

Rob, I would expect the first offer in to be low ball.

Remember if you have been in that time it has all spun round the other way.

You cannot expect as much as you may have done 8 years ago post lithium.

It was going to be two gold sales then lithium development.

Now it is lithium first then two Goldfield sales, or now maybe one to mine.

Rob, as we spoke about previously you aren't selling neither am I so I don't care and neither should you.

Others will not be putting in a lump sum but regular premiums so I am happy for them.

Trading is trading and things like this happen for them.

But SC would not impact a buyout in any way shape or form, so if that surprise happens early we are in. Also if an SC RNS lands to say complete.

Humster because the whole lot is invented Horlicks.

But they are being noticed. Which is the troll objective.

Exactly BFD.

The plant cost is one cost and according to Bernard in budget.

The cost to produce one tonne of concentrate is in the opex not capex at just under 650 dollars per tonne. Not in both budgets.

Steve has built and ran umpteen mines, Hainan are miners and Bernard has a lot of industry experience plus the budgets are AISC the highest in mining standards for inclusion.

The idea that they forgot to include stocking the mine ready for shipment is nursery school conversation never mind primary school stuff.

Ever heard of Tesco building a supermarket and forgetting the stock?

Everyone jumping to their tune and doing loads of hard work on their behalf.

Apparently that is where they get their kicks.

Confusing I know, but I saw people in latex suits top to bottom having a tea party on TV and apparently they are having an amazing time too.

Yes Painless I agree, I don't agree with net zero it is too regimented.

It needs slow methodical implementation within technology limits and joined up roll out.

Just as one example why not have a new potential business park next to a sensible number of power generators, wind or whatever and as soon as not required for the grid feed into large batteries for energy hungry industry to use in peak times at ultra low cost.

Same as infrastructure such as the massive water project north to south which requires water pumping.

Energy into greenhouses to produce food currently flown in and so forth.

Use green energy efficiently, smooth out the grid and aid business.

At the moment all they are doing is putting the generation where the current grid allows.

Blyth for instance is where the power station for Alcan was so the infrastructure allows the wind generators to be there and feed into the grid.

Evolution is better than revolution.

PS for homes they are charging these up on economy then using them to run in peak as well as providing power cut back up.

We are getting close to something really good with these.

Joe Stocks totally agree, I have been watching the technology and price of these home batteries.

They are getting better all of the time, for anyone working from home the solid state are good value now really good systems £4k.

Business offices should be buying them now if they run on servers.

A house can run a couple of days on them now.

Lithium still in these solid state batteries.

Not quite sure what Barrick have been thinking about with their actions, this sort of behaviour belongs in the 1950s to 1970s, surely they saw the Leo case and goldmine.

Seems they have not been paying Mali contractors if this article is correct, this will go one way, and it will not be good for Barrick, 2 years of arguing about tax with a government:

https://m.miningweekly.com/article/barrick-gold-contractors-in-mali-lay-off-staff-amid-government-dispute-documents-sources-2025-04-29