Member Info for LedZep

Isn't the compensation for the replacement transformer @4000 euro per day greater than the loss of El Romeral revenue per day?

A small positive in the short term

Could be a combination of things but my view is that once it's confirmed that we can meet upcoming costs for Viura from existing revenue in May, preventing the need for a fund raise, then we should see increased interest.

It has been said by the company previously that investment opportunities were being sought without the need for shareholder dilution, I think at the end of 2023, and then we had the fundraise for Viura, hence the apprehension about diving in too soon.

We shall see in the coming weeks.

Here we go again......

Seems like the reasons for the recent days shenanigans with the sp are beginning to show themselves.

If the background buyer has filled their boots then it should be a clear run north for a while. If there is an unsubstantiated drop, then the games are continuing.

Get your point Oilboy, and did consider that thought, but for me the MMS are too keen to raise the bid above the 6p parapet, on limited buys, like they just did.

If it is placing shares being offloaded there must be a healthy buying appetite for the bid to move like it is doing.

The amount of fishing being done today by the MMS, bouncing the bid down to 5.8 on a couple of occasions now, shows how much upward momentum is just around the corner.

They tried taking it down to 5.30 a few days ago, and then increasing the bid through 5.7 up to 6.0 with few bits. Must be trying to fill background buys imo.

JW - you were a lot closer to the mark regarding Selva revenues, I had a glitch in the conversion of cubic metres to Mwhours.

We could be generating approx € 4.6m p.a to Pxen from Selva and €11.7m p.a. to Pxen from Viura based on 78000 cu.m. and 500,000 cu.m. per day respectively.

All based on € 42 ttf price.

All high level figures with no inclusion of taxes, royalties, operating costs, etc. but nevertheless looking pretty good for Pxen.

As we are clawing back the initial capital investment from the revenue and offsetting this against next year's development costs, the cash call next May should be significantly reduced, if not eliminated, ttf prices allowing.

Do Pxen get to reclaim the next round of development costs from production, at the 15% level as Pxen are funding at the 15% level and not 7.5% ??

C'mon JW, stop teasing and do say why you think Po valley is double.

Hang on, let me have a guess. You've used the historical productIon and revenue earned?

Just crunching a few numbers here, and it's a bit messy with the various units in play, but I calculate the following, based on €42 ttf, attributable to Pxen:

Po valley @ 80,000 cu.m /day = €5624 per day to pxen

Viura @ 500000 cu.m /day = €13775 per day to pxen in the short term.

That's €19399 per day or €7m per annum.

Pretty good revenues plus income from El Romeral.

Not sure if the following has been posted already. Mark Routh talks through the latest company presentation from a couple of weeks ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVlWQ-cLncU

Sebo, you asked for views.

The Friday interview reminded me of a World War 2 motto- " Lose lips sinks ships"

Some of the info divulged in the interview re: PFS, dates being pushed back, reference to the 10 % , being aggressive etc. should have been released with the

agreement RNS, that we are anticipating and not via interview, IMO.

Investors in AIM do not like uncertainty, and this is what the interview did, particularly around, what does 50% mean? So the more nervous/ unclear decided to sell a few off, until clarity is restored.

IMO, GM forgot who this interview was aimed at, and it became a fireside discussion between two mineral sands experts, and the clarity that was in the first Crux interview, that is needed by investors, was lost.

Perhaps, GM had become over familiar with what he meant by 50% and didn't provide the granularity when needed.

Basically it appears the project timescales have been pushed out to provide time to meet Sheffields requirements of PFS, upgraded resource etc. because we will be doing things their way.

Only a few days, hopefully until full details released.

Regarding sp, hate to put a downer on things, but on release of news, if it breaks 6.5 p I'll be surprised. This is because, a JV has been in the pipeline a while, and won't be received like a bolt out of the blue, and the sp will have the inevitable pull back just like Kod and Arcm on their JV news, IMO.

Not trolling here, just honest opinion.

VII, I think you are on the button with your diagnosis of the present issue, given the information that is available to us. I've been watching this for the past few days and don't believe it's a shorting situation.

Normally, shorting is more long cycle, drip- drip, selling to put pressure on the sp, coupled with BB naysayers spreading FUD. In this case this isn't happening. The sells on TSX have been bomb bursts of selling throughout their day, causing a drop on our market opening. However, yesterday, most of the trading volume was over by our 4.00 pm, with some uppy- downy ( mostly uppy-), into their close of market. So is it safe to get back into the water, more than likely IMO.

So with the large volumes being traded on TSX over the past few days and what could be the big finish yesterday, Osiskos 41 m maybe just about gone.

Let's see what Monday brings.

Hi guys & gals

Just indulging in a PHE chat catchup, to see if this has developed into anything more than a smoke & mirrors s*it show and nothing tangible as yet.

Bertmonkey : yep, sold out 18 months ago, but did come out with an overall positive return, so no financial complaints.

When a major shareholder is pushing a " fill yer boots" message, whilst merrily dumping in the background, set against a high turnover of CEOs, with no tangible delivery and a myriad of false promises re: Protos, I no longer trusted them with my hard earned.

As Plantdad has said Plot 10b is just for the wildlife at the moment, with no signs of potential progress.

Good Luck to the long termers here who are sticking with it, you certainly deserve some kind of return for your persistency.

Excellent RNS with competition generated for the funding of the project. Seems to be a slow burner, in terms of investor awareness, with a few weaker holders cashing in, sp should respond over coming days.

Tread carefully with Sound Energy. A very chequered history when JP was at the helm. A case of research, research and then more research. May have turned a corner with new CEO but check back for all outstanding debt and when due for repayment, alongside the funding for extracting and processing the gas to commercialise. Worth reading the BB for a heads up, and several years of RNSs.

Pompey : Been in Sav for 9 years, now out, after the political fiasco but waiting for it to sort itself out. Big potential there, just like here.

There's folk who took the rns as a longer term positive and are adding on the dip.

There's folk who took the rns as a negative and sold up and left the building.

There's folk who took the rns as an immediate negative, sold up, but can see the longer term positive and will spread fud to hopefully get a lower dip to buy back into. C'est la vie.

I'm taking yesterday's rns as a short term sacrifice for a longer term better deal. I think we are forgetting the situation the company was in when the MOU was first signed in May '23. CMet we're then in a pretty weak position regarding the mining licences and perhaps the approach by LB was seen as ' a bird in the hand was worth 2 in the bush' kind of thing.

Exclusivity agreements favour the potential partner, in the main, and on that basis CMet were somewhat over a barrel, but some form of potential funding was better than none, for the foreseeable. IMO, it gave time for CMet to chew over a back stop agreement, but now with licences reinstated, there are either suitors gathering or CMet think they can attract better suitors by going in the shop window.

It could be that CMet were asking for better MOU terms in conjunction with extending the exclusivity but these weren't forthcoming, hence end of exclusivity period.

Another possible factor that I've not looked into yet is the forecasted price of the main driver elements, ilmenite and zircon, and how they may of changed over past months.

A key phrase in the rns for me was " free to pursue additional options and funding structures" i.e. better terms are now required by CMet.

We'll see how it pans out.

Threshold crossed on 14th Dec when sp was around 4.5p,so looks like Bart have been accumulating in the mid to high 4s. It appears that they think this can really stretch it's legs on good news.

Before this subject grows arms and legs again, and various spurious calculations are made, let's not forget that most jvs with junior miners and larger partners are organised through a joint venture vehicle that protects the interests of the parent companies and shareholders, as per Kodal and Arc Minerals.

Admittedly this has not been stated as the case yet but would be very surprised if CMet didn't follow a version of the above models.

Also, the Jorc resource identified only covers about 5% of the licence, so this little minnow has huge resource potential and that would not have gone unspoken in the CMet/ LB discussions to date, imo.