Member Info for Manlord

HNY Ageos,

Thank you for posting and ATB for 2026. Hopefully we will have continued engagement from you as and when time permits.

Enjoy your weekend

ML

Hilarious!

No thought of him or even a mention in 48 hrs and from replies I can only deduce that somehow any info I was sharing on Empire and our copper anomalies back almost 4 years ago was somehow wrong and he has found issue with it - 2 years before he even arrived.

Oh dear!

At what point does this become extremely embarrassing as an adult? I’m genuinely ashamed of being dragged down into the gutter with him.

I can only apologise to all genuine holders here but even when I say absolutely nothing, he can’t help ruining the board for everyone.

It’s not his fault, he’s clearly not well.

ML

Hi Doc,

Good question.

Possible, yes, but probably limited. To move from Indicated to Measured we would need very tight drill spacing and strong continuity in grade and geology so any upgrade to measured would “likely” only be in very well defined, high-grade areas of the Thomas core target area. If the latest drilling confirms the continuity we’re expecting, a small upgrade could happen, but I wouldn’t expect a big jump.

Again, I’m no geologist but that’s my expectations at the minute.

ML

With drilling results due any day now, personally I’m not expecting anything dramatic or unexpected.

This drill programme was about doing the hard, necessary work that has to be completed before the bigger catalysts can follow.

What I would hope to see is confirmation that the Ti02 rich core at Thomas continues to deliver grades at or slightly above the current MRE average(5.1%).

Even a modest uplift would be meaningful at this scale, particularly given that only around 20% of the known mineralised footprint is currently included in the resource.

At a minimum, I would expect strong confirmation of continuity, thickness and consistency of mineralisation from surface into bedrock, along with clear confirmation that the cores have been successfully recovered and fed into metallurgical and pilot scale testwork. That outcome is probably more important than the headline grade. That would be huge progress IMHO.

Metallurgical data, pilot scale readiness and geological confidence are all prerequisites for the larger value drivers to come in H1 (my timeline estimate).

There is always the chance of an extra positive line on grades, metallurgy or next-step timing, but for me this RNS is about de-risking and momentum. If it does exactly what it was designed to do, then the project is moving exactly as it should at this stage and in line with what the BoD have planned for 2026.

Anyone hoping or expecting to see or hear anything different from above?

All IMHO.

DYOR

ML

Hi Reserved,

Thanks for that, I agree with your take. One of the main points for me in the podcast was the discussion around the importance of having very low concentrations of deleterious elements in the ore, and just how expensive and time-consuming it is to separate and remove unwanted elements during processing. They specifically referenced thorium as an example of something you absolutely do not want present, given the complexity, cost and regulatory burden it introduces (starts around 17 minutes).

What I found really interesting was how closely that mirrors the way SB has described Pitfield in a number of interviews. He has consistently highlighted the extremely low levels of deleterious elements in the ore, including thorium, using almost the exact same explanation and rationale as was outlined on the podcast. That alignment, for me, was really telling.

When you combine that ore quality with the fact that Australia has an abundance of high quality laboratories and facilities capable of running continuous piloting with serious amounts of tonnage, as SB has also referenced, it really underlines why the cost, time and execution profile should be materially more favourable. For Pitfield, the make up of the ore itself appears to be a genuine advantage, not just from a technical standpoint, but from a commercial and timeline perspective as well.

When you look at institutions like Curtin University and the CSIRO, I get the sense the same genuine enthusiasm that came through so clearly from the scientists, geologists and engineers on this US podcast would be similar in WA. There is a real excitement around the future of critical minerals, and for good reason. If organisations of that calibre are aware of Pitfield and the potential it represents, particularly as a possible global scale source of high quality titanium from a stable and safe jurisdiction, it is hard to imagine that interest not filtering right down to the laboratory level. We can be fairly confident that the technicians and researchers involved are keen to be part of something that could prove genuinely special, and that kind of support and momentum can make a huge difference in getting Pitfield into production.

ATB

ML

17 mins in they focus on the costs and time associated with deleterious elements in any ore (Thorium for example in the podcast as has been referenced by SB many times). It appears these guys are very aware of the problems with separation of elements and the advantages of having low contamination levels and ease of processing.

Anyway, hopefully some find it helpful and informative.

ML

Government policy reflects this and as we’ve seen in the US, titanium is listed on the critical minerals list, with domestic and allied supply tied directly to defence readiness. In the EU, titanium is covered in the “Critical Raw Materials” framework which focuses on strategic autonomy, security of supply, and the green transition.

Australia has designated titanium as a critical mineral and is actively supporting exploration, development, and downstream processing through policy, funding, and strategic initiatives (Export Finance as mentioned by SB in recent interviews).

The real problem is processing, pilot-scale testing, extraction, and de-risking new supply chains so private capital can realistically step in. That applies just as much to titanium as it does to RE’s from what they discussed.

Im in no doubt that Pitfield sit within the same global theme being discussed by national labs (CSIRO for example), policymakers, and defence departments.

These lads clearly state that the focus is about developing new, secure sources of critical material at a time when governments are openly acknowledging that existing supply chains are fragile, overly concentrated, and strategically risky. A project like Pitfield in WA is exactly what these guys are talking about without actually talking about Pitfield. There will be those who will say titanium isn’t linked to RE’s but they are wrong, don’t listen to me, listen to the scientists and experts.

Let me know what you think.

For those filtered, don’t bother :-)

ATB

ML

https://youtu.be/Yz5B0pMQzSk?si=3E-ESAAte0E_iH35

Evening all,

Strange day of sales given we’re getting closer to the expected January drilling results.

Anyway, I don’t expect everyone to want to, or even have the interest in, sitting down to listen to a full podcast on rare earths and critical minerals but I’ll post the link anyway.

I listened to it in the car on my journey home and I found it interesting, especially in terms of clarifying the difference between rare earth elements / critical minerals, and the misunderstanding that titanium somehow sits outside this story. It doesn’t!

As we know titanium isn’t a rare earth, but it most certainly plays a role in the same strategic narrative, and that misunderstanding is addressed clearly in the discussion. If you do have the time, even half an hour in the car, I’d strongly recommend giving it a listen. To be honest, even the first 5 minutes make it fairly clear where titanium sits purely from a defence and strategic materials perspective.

For those that do not have the time to listen, basically 1 of the main points made by the panel (scientists from Idaho National Laboratory) is that economies are not dependent on just 1 or 2 exotic materials, but on a whole range of roughly 60+ critical minerals. RE elements are just one subset of that group which we’ve seen dominate the media recently. The main challenge is not whether something is geologically rare, but whether its supply chain is fragile or exposed to geopolitical leverage. That is what makes a material critical (explained in first 5 mins).

They also explain why RE’s are not rare in the typical sense and that large deposits are now dominated by low value light RE’s, while the higher value heavy RE’s needed for magnets are harder to find, harder to separate, and significantly more expensive to process.

When mining, separation, refining, and pricing are dominated by one country (Chinese / Russian supply) the entire supply chain becomes vulnerable.

The very same vulnerabilities exist across critical materials that underpin defence systems, aerospace, energy infrastructure, EVs and advanced manufacturing.

This IMO is where titanium fits directly into the same conversation. Its strength to weight ratio, corrosion resistance, and performance in extreme environments make it indispensable in aerospace, defence platforms, medical implants, EV components, industrial alloys, and of course pigments as SB always says it’s the whitest of white and has no substitute. Titanium supply chains are highly concentrated, particularly at the processing and upgrading stages, which creates the same strategic vulnerabilities.

CTD…

Let’s hope the same patience here sees similar rewards GB.

ATB

ML

There’s no doubt I’m on the brighter side of our investment Gymboy :-)

If people saw my communications to our previous CEO and indeed our current one at times, they would have no concerns about whether I’m willing or able to query, question and be very critical of certain decisions made by the company and our investments.

I recently made a detailed post about the current risks involved with this investment, of which there are a few, none that can’t be addressed or surmounted.

All part of being an investor and hopefully it pays off LT for us GB 🤞🏼

ML

3 replies!!!!

That must have cut the skid mark deep!

Truth hurts eh!

ATB

ML

Thanks JNB.

I see multiple green box replies and people I certainly respect replying to our human skid mark. What a surprise, the only post removed is the one highlighting the truth about him. No change there, the skid mark will remove anything he doesn’t agree with or paints his true identity.

I started a Saudi thread given the latest news on investment and I’ve been a huge advocate of their support since Fahad Al Tamini got involved. I’ve spoken to SB about him and he was very happy with his involvement and huge financial backing at 12p which Shaun told me at the time would be very beneficial to the company back then and has proven to be correct.

Let’s remind ourselves of what the skid mark said about our largest and most supportive shareholder.

Dustyslay

26 Jan 2024 08:41

Posts: 13,588

Price: 10.70

Did the Saudis jump on there jet with all our cash or something? Who really wants these lot involved, this was supposed to be a company tasked with filling a list of critical materials compiled by the UK for the years to come and yet its obviously open to the highest bidder who will have no interest in shareholder value or the sp, they will take everything from us, it seems Shaun has had by the kingdom”

Found this from way back too! What an absolute joke of a man. A bonafide liar proven over and over and over. Some people won’t remember, some people weren’t here but this skid mark has openly belittled the analysis of Ageos to the point he won’t post here anymore, which is a huge loss to all of us genuine holders. Has openly said he hopes this share goes to zero for shareholders and has purposely set out to disrupt this board. If people respect that and think it’s assists potential new or current investors, think again. If I was looking in here for the first time I’d walk immediately and seek advice and information elsewhere. It’s not good for anyone looking to inform themselves on Empire.

Even when on filter and ignored, he try’s to bait anyone and everyone. What an utterly despicable “shareholder”.

Dustyslay

23 Feb 2024 14:31

Posts: 13,588

Price: 10.05

Ive just sold all my empire stock coz my phone was open I'm my bloody pocket!!!!! Omg what a creaser

Evening all,

There’s been a lot of discussion and media reports recently about what Saudi Arabia is doing in mining, particularly with the amount of capital being committed and the shift in strategy away from simple dig and ship models.

Based on one of our largest shareholders being from Saudi (Fahad Al Tamimi), I think it’s worth looking at whether any of this has any real relevance for Empire without forcing connections that aren’t don’t exit right now.

To be clear, there is no direct link to Ma’aden involvement, no PIF angle (public investment fund) etc but I do think there’s a future alignment that could take place given his strategic involvement. SB says he is incredibly supportive and I would assume FaT has done a decent level of due diligence to match his investment.

What Saudi Arabia is building through Ma’aden is effectively a vertically integrated minerals platform. They’re focusing on downstream processing, refining and control of value, with critical minerals treated as strategic infrastructure rather than a simple commodity export.

Based on that objective, one can assume that a titanium project such as Pitfield would become strategically interesting to the Kingdom / PIF etc.

If you look at where Saudi private capital is being deployed, which is early-stage, large-scale critical material projects in stable Western jurisdictions, Empire sits comfortably within that scope.

My view is that FaT is a private investor allocating capital in line with this broader Saudi strategic direction. Saudi capital also has a history of using private or semi-private investment proxies as a way of gaining early exposure before anything becomes state-backed so it’s not inconceivable.

Yes rare earths are dominating the headlines, but the underlying strategy extends well beyond REE’s. Titanium is critical to aerospace using just one example and it fits the same strategic materials framework, even if it currently attracts less attention media wise.

AFAIC the sensible conclusion is that there is potential alignment given they are following a similar strategic map just getting there with different vehicles. If Pitfield continues to de-risk through ‘26 and firms up processing routes, end products and project economics, that is when Pitfield will start to move. We’re not there yet, but I suspect this is how progress typically unfolds.

Again, I’m not saying or trying to force a Saudi narrative onto Empire, but I am saying that it’s entirely feasible that a wealth fund outside of Australia could easily deploy significant capital into a project like Pitfield as it fits perfectly with their long-term minerals strategy.

ATB

ML

https://ibb.co/FvZKYkf

full link test.

**********************************/2024/06/empire-metals-ltd-june-2024/

ml

Well 18 months has passed since this article (10p at time of publication) and I guess it’s up to each individual shareholder to assess whether the value added was enormous (circa 370% up and counting).

Circle the wagons!

https://total- market-solutions.com/2024/06/empire-metals-ltd-june-2024/

ML

They likely would also have conducted multiple site visits and follow-up questions over months to ensure their valuation reflects the reality on the ground. This wasn’t a desk exercise conducted by a small bulletin board share picker site, it’s a hands-on, boots on the ground exercise designed to give institutional clients confidence and belief in what has been presented to them by CG.

The real takeaway here that Empire has now been validated as an institutional grade opportunity, and IMHO that’s the real significance of Canaccord’s involvement.

A top tier mining broker has formally decided Empire Metals Ltd is now an institutional grade investment opportunity.

It’s also widely understood that industry broker notes are often released ahead of or alongside potential market moving news, so there’s every reason to think Empire could announce developments soon to give Canaccord and potential investors a clearer view of potential returns, a common sense approach in this context but that’s just my view.

DYOR

ML

Having reviewed Cannacords website in detail and read multiple articles related to their overall business and mining arm, the key point here for me isn’t Cannacords target price, it’s the decision and timing to initiate coverage on Empire. The hugely significant difference in this broker note is that Cannacord Genuity are the farthest thing away from a retail tipster platform. They are a global investment bank with billions of dollars on their books, experts in mining companies whose core clients are institutions, funds, family offices and professional investors. They are well known for getting involved with early-stage mining stories which they believe the asset has genuine potential, often before everything is fully de-risked as is the case here with Empire, but only once a project is credible and scalable, again, as is the case with Empire and our current development status.

It’s also worth discussing and understanding why their position would naturally be conservative in terms of target price, NAV & discount factor. As a broker dealing primarily with II’s, their credibility matters far more than short-term hype. If they gave an overly aggressive valuation and blue sky SP calls, it would more than likely lead to them undermine the trust they have built up over years of business, encourage short-term trading and make the story far less attractive to long-term capital, especially ahead of our planned ASX listing. A measured, defensible approach supports our SP stability, increases liquidity and sustains new institutional engagement rather than a spike to £1 (example price only) followed by weakness.

To put some scale around it, the valuation implied by the note works out at around £440m. That’s not a stretched number in the context of what Empire is trying to build, and it reinforces the point that this is about validation rather than overhyped exuberance.

Given we will dual list, the ASX listing price won’t be set by a broker note anyway, it will simply reflect where the AIM market is trading at the time and an FX conversion will be made. In terms of capital availability, Cannacord raised over C$37b for companies globally last year ( https://www.canaccordgenuity.com/capital-markets/) so funding avenues are plentiful if they have confidence in what they are seeing.

It’s also important to appreciate what coverage from a broker like Canaccord actually entails. For a valuation of this scale, they would have done thorough due diligence. That typically includes meeting the board and management to challenge assumptions and understand SB’s strategy, visiting the Pitfield site to inspect drilling operations, review the labs and bench testing data, logistics, and reviewing all previous technical and metallurgical reports which is referenced on their website too (Not Empire specific).

CTD…..

Based on a valuation question from Telegram. The 6

If we hit the expected milestones over the next year, Cannacord would likely adjust the NAV based target in a couple of ways.

First they could raise the NAV with same discount of 0.5 so basically if NAV per share grows from £1.24 to £2 (just used £2 as example) because of multiple strategic progress the target becomes £2 × 0.5 = £1.00.

They could also increase the NAV and the multiplier (0.9 for example) so NAV goes to £2 and risks drop (JV, II investment, Govt funding) giving £2 × 0.9 = £1.80.

The NAV growth will reflect our operational success in 2026 or at any point in time, while multiplier changes reflect lower risks by achieving operational objectives. Both together can make the target jump significantly above today’s £1.24 snapshot based on today’s risk profile and resource estimates.

64p reflects a conservative NAV with a discount for early-stage risk.

£1.28 would reflect a more optimistic scenario within their current assumptions.

Over the next 5 years, if Empire hit all their milestones, grow the project, secure offtakes or JV, Govt funding or reduce risks, both the NAV per share and the multiplier would rise. That means the “full potential” share price should be well above that 64p to £1.28 range, depending on how much value and risk are unlocked by SB & Co.

Make no mistake, the broker target price is a short to medium term, risk-adjusted snapshot, not the ultimate ceiling price. They cannot know that with so many unknowns as of right now.

Hope that helps. DYOR.

ML

They referenced first production 2030, with full run-rate output 2031 with margins 50%+ driven by strong grades, easy strip mining and the potential for premium anatase-grade pigment. Most bulk mining operations operate with EBITDA margins in the 25%- 40% range, with anything above that usually reserved for either exceptionally low cost assets or producers of higher value specialty materials. A margin above 50% confirms we have a significant cost advantage, strong pricing power, or both which also gives us a buffer against commodity price volatility. Overall it’s a very bold statement that means Pitfield can remain profitable through downturns and generate strong cash flow which is exactly what shareholders and II’s want.

The risks are also acknowledged (funding, process optimisation and titanium pricing) but their conclusion is fairly definitive, the combination of scale, jurisdictional quality in WA, and exposure to a strategic metal puts Empire and shareholders in a very strong position to re-rate as the Pitfield progresses throughout 26 and beyond.

Cannacord are a major Aussie broker with very deep institutional reach, and this coverage ties in neatly with the ASX listing. That alone should improve visibility with Aussie institutions, specialist mining funds and critical minerals investors who may not have engaged before. Add in the PR and credibility that comes with a serious broker note, and you start to see how this could broaden the shareholder base over time and increase liquidity.

For context, as of FY2025, Canaccord’s wealth arm had over $120 billion in client assets which is a substantial client base of retail and II’s. 

Their operations are located in USA, U.K, EU, Asia, Aus so a fairly global investor audience.

In marketing, they reference newsletter audiences >150,000 so you’d have to expect some nibbles looking for a close 50% profit. I’m not saying it will shoot to 60p but we can now assume, backed by strong information that Empire will gradually be viewed less as a junior explorer and more as a long-term strategic materials play. It’s all about execution and delivery now.

A full run 30 year mine with 50% margins does not sit in the hundreds of millions MC btw, it sits in the billions.

DYOR.

Enjoy your weekends.

I’m still trying to get over the Newcastle comeback on Wednesday night but a 4-3 win on the day Kevin Keegan was diagnosed as being very sick was probably fate so I’m ok with it.

ML

Good afternoon all and thanks for sharing Trojan.

Ignoring the Friday SP, it’s been a very enlightening day for Rmpire.

Thought I’d share a few thoughts on the Canaccord note and why, for me at least, it feels like more than just another broker target.

Of course, people will naturally latch onto the buy rating and the 62p target versus the current 45p SP, but having read through it properly, the most interesting part is how they are framing Pitfield.

It isn’t written like a speculative exploration story, rather Canaccord are very clearly treating Pitfield as a future industrial scale titanium operation. They focus heavily on scale, quality and longevity, describing the project as a large, high-grade, long-life, low-cost asset with the potential to supply high value titanium products into critical minerals supply chains.

The scale is undeniably huge based on the October MRE (2.2BT at 5.1% Ti02, containing 113MT of Ti02). What stood out to me most was the emphasis on the current resource alone supporting an initial 30yr mine life. That’s a big statement at this stage and definitely reduces the usual resource risk that can plague early projects like ours.

Like I said recently, that single point moves the conversation from “is it big enough?” to “how does it get built”.

We’re also now getting info on valuation, CG have used the “Net Asset Value” approach, which is also telling IMO. They are valuing Pitfield as a future operating mine, not as blue-sky pipe dream.

On their assumptions, the unrisked NAV comes out at around £1.24 per share based on the current share count. They have then applied a conservative 0.5x NAV multiple, which brings them back to the 62p target price. I assume this was done because we are still pre-development.

AFAIC the NAV is essentially the theoretical value of the project if it were built and operating. The 0.5x multiple is the risk discount reflecting funding, processing and execution at this stage which they referred to at the end of the note. As risks are reduced in 2026, that multiple can expand well past 1 or 1.5. Even after allowing for potential future equity raises to fund development they still arrive at a fully diluted NAV of 82p per share, which suggests the market is currently pricing in a lot of caution, which is of course right, but also means we have a monumental opportunity here as shareholders.

2026 is certainly positioned as a key de-risking year with further drilling at Thomas and Cosgrave, bulk metallurgical test work, and a scoping study in H2. These updates are hugely important because they will firm up our processing route, end product selection and the project economics, which are exactly the boxes II’s / govt agencies etc. want ticked.

CTD…..