Member Info for Manlord

One important thing worth highlighting, because it’s easy to misinterpret (and I did myself previously), is that these “Mtpa” figures refer to ore throughput, not final saleable product.

So when you see numbers in the SVML DFS from yesterday outline 12Mtpa to 24Mtpa, that’s the amount of ore being processed. Once you factor in a base level 5% TiO2 grade and realistic recoveries (65% to 70%) that actually converts into something more like 300,000t to 800,000t of final product depending on scale.

That’s why the 360,000t to 400,000t figures referenced in the S&P Platts article makes complete sense as an initial target for us.

On the production side, the pilot plant obviously isn’t a full mining operation, and any rates mentioned in the article are start-up or indicative only. The real purpose at that stage is to prove the process, generate product, validate recoveries, and feed into future mine design and economic studies in ‘26 as SB has confirmed.

From everything I’ve read, a phased scale-up is standard as you don’t just jump straight into a 40Mt operation. You build it in stages as confidence, data, and hopefully the economics improve.

What SB seems to be doing appears to be very deliberate, proving metallurgy, expanding scale aggressively, selectively increasing confidence where it matters (Thomas), and setting up for pilot work and the next stage of economic studies.

Again we’re not trying to prove everything all at once. We’re proving what’s needed to unlock initial value from the market and that’s why we don’t need the full area to be measured. We need a high-confidence starter zone, backed by a massive long-life resource that can be developed over time and that’s exactly the direction this is heading based on what I can see.

I now want to see how much of Thomas tightens into that high-confidence core. We know the overall scale will increase in the next MRE but it will be interesting to confirm the exact timing toward pilot and whether our economics are robust or bust! I think the former based on drill data so far, continuity and consistency won’t be an issue.

At the end of the day, I do think there’s a bit of naivety out there when it comes to timelines and expectations on a project of this scale where some believe there is no plan or definitive timelines.

IMHO we’re methodically building what could be a globally significant, district-scale titanium system. I don’t see delays here, I see a very structured approach to getting it right and if the BoD execute this properly, the value creation will come in layers. For me, we’re right on track.

DYOR

Enjoy your weekends.

ML

Where I had also tripped myself up was thinking the step out work would somehow lead directly to measured across those new areas, and then questioning whether we’d just need to go back and drill it all again anyway. Once I actually played it out properly, it clicked. The step out won’t prove those areas to measured right now, especially under RC when DD couldn’t in first MRE spacing, my understanding now is that it’s about defining the scale of the system. The measured classification is being driven by the infill at Thomas (close spacing drill holes) and that’s the important part for the near term plans.

So when we see the drilling campaign update and the follow on updated MRE, it won’t be a case of everything suddenly becoming measured. What I now expect to see is a high-confidence core emerging at Thomas (measured + indicated), surrounded by a broader indicated zone, and then a very large additional area of inferred/indicated scale from the step-out work in the latest drill areas.

And that ties directly into the starter pit, which was the other part I needed to properly get my head around. The objective here is to define enough high-confidence material in one area to support initial mining. That’s the whole point of the current approach as far as I can see.

Again I believe this is exactly how you’d expect a project like ours to evolve. I also had the slight misconception that a starter pit would be small (don’t ask why, I just did based on how it sounds which is silly). The word had me thinking it wasn’t important to our value and would be just enough to get us going for pilot. When I ran the numbers it’s clearly not the case.

Although it would be referenced as a starter pit, Pitfield is massive in real terms, and this measured hotspot area is still enormous.

I wrote this on LSE yesterday to try and frame the scale of what we have, any runners amongst us?

“To put Pitfield into context, if Eliud Kipchoge ran the full boundary, he’d be knocking out close to 4 marathons back to back and still wouldn’t have explored a single inch of what’s underneath it. That’s nearly 9 hours flat out running. It’s MONUMENTAL in size.”

Back to the in-fill part of the current drilling, as I said earlier, the 2.2Bt won’t be converted to measured as we don’t need to. All we need in this starter zone to provide enough measured & indicated material to support say 10 to 20 yrs of production at a sensible throughput rate.

If you run some rough numbers, it’s pretty eye-opening. For example, even 100Mt of measured material would give us 20 yrs at 5Mtpa or 10 yrs at 10Mtpa.

Step that up to 200Mt and we’re comfortably into 10 to 20+ yrs at even higher rates. I’ll leave it to the more technical guys (Ageos etc.) to sanity check those assumptions, but directionally it proves the point we’re definitely not short of runway here.

CTD….

Morning all,

Only got around to this late last night and I’ll be honest, I had a few things I needed clarity, mainly around 3 areas which the latest presentation which in fairness hasn’t changed massively from Feb helped me with.

The flowsheet and whether we should have a “final” version by now?

How the current drilling campaign actually feeds into measured vs indicated status (main reason I was confused)

and then what a realistic starter pit for the piloting / future market valuation phase would look like.

Having gone through it properly, I’m now far more comfortable with how this is all shaping up. I’m sure most of you were fully clear on what to expect but I had almost confused myself with some incorrect assumptions on the drilling campaign, but I’ve ironed them out now.

Ok so looking at the flowsheet, we do have a defined processing route, it’s just not locked in yet and as far as I can tell, this is exactly how it should be at this stage. There seems to be a narrative (ADVFN) that we’re lagging behind and should have a finished flowsheet and product in hand by now. Maybe some here feel the same, but I don’t see it that way at all.

We’ve already achieved a 99%+ TiO2 product, strong recoveries, and established that scrubbing, gravity, flotation & leach will likely be the main process pathway. That’s the hard part done in my opinion and now the likes of NM (based on her LinkedIn post) will be optimising and improving recoveries, reducing cost implications, and simplifying the process for the long-term benefit of the project. Everything I’ve read suggests you don’t lock a flowsheet down until after bulk testwork and pilot runs, so the fact it’s still evolving is actually a positive for me, not a concern like some others are suggesting.

Now the drilling and MRE side, which is where I initially got a bit tangled. This was the main thing I wanted to properly understand. There are effectively two programmes running in parallel (I had mistakenly been thinking about it as one).

We have infill drilling at Thomas which should increase confidence and move the area toward measured status (not all of it like I had somehow had in my head). Then we have the step out drilling across the wider system (bringing explored licence area to roughly 60% - 70%) which is focused on scale and expanding the overall footprint.

CTD….

We’re NOT there yet, but that doesn’t concern me in the slightest.

Sorry typo.

ML

Hi Munchkins.

Their RNS is actually quite timely because I’m currently in the middle of trying to make some assumptions and basic calculations on our potential annual production rates amongst other things. I actually had on my draft 5Mt per annum but it seems they think it’s closer to 12Mt to 24Mt (obviously it’s a different business so won’t be exact). I’m going to keep the 5Mt anyway because I’d prefer it to be cautious rather than use any numbers that’s actually in a bankable DFS that they’ve just provided. Anyway, I’ll share that later on when I’ve completed the exercise. It was actually just a bit based around my expectations and understandings of the current drill program and how that was going to affect the previously communicated MRE at Thomas and what it was going to provide in the other 50% area that we’re doing the step out drilling rather than infill. Anyway, I’ll come back to that this evening.

Their RNS is basically showing us what a titanium project looks like with DFS. Costs nailed down, returns clear, proper pathway to getting built.

We’re there yet, but that doesn’t concern me in the slightest. They’re on the exact path you’d expect, just earlier, and the big difference here is scale and optionality. If Narelle Marriot gets the flowsheet right, the upside here is on another level simply because of how big Pitfield is.

For me this is a net positive all day long. We now have a proper benchmark, so we can point to something and say right, that’s what “good” looks like in terms of costs, margins, returns etc.

I don’t see them as direct competitors at all right now. Different stage, different approach but maybe there’s some overlap down the line (a concern for them, not us IMO).

Kasiya sets the standard in some areas, (not all as location is not one of them for me) but that doesn’t limit or affect us in any way. If anything it shows us how big this could get if Pitfield is firmed up fully which I’ve no doubt it will. Our numbers are quite literally off the charts which as the worlds largest deposit, you’d expect. Good luck to them and any investors involved with both companies.

ML

North of 5m Gorilla yes!

TBH, having gone through those drops without selling a single share, you just get used to the big up and big down days. As a full on LTH with zero interest in trading the volatility one way or the other, the +10% day last week for example just got ignored and viewed as nothing more than a blue day. Same for any red days. The focus is 2026, 2027 and beyond for me.

Of course, there will be people here thinking “that’s madness and you should have sold everything at 50p, 60p, 70p etc etc, and I can understand that view. Some people did sell on the way up and I congratulate them if that was their strategy. It’s just not my strategy and we will clearly take gains and losses at different stages along the route to “hopefully” full production.

There’s something relatively soothing about knowing you’ve built up a significant shareholding (based on my personal circumstances) in one of the most exciting, well run, high grade, easy strip, low contaminated, tier 1 located, district scale Titanium deposits on the globe, all with ultra consistent continuity across the license area which is bigger than Greater London in area!

To put the size of Pitfield in better understood context for any shareholders that run or are fans of long distance running, If Eliud Kipchoge ran the full boundary of Pitfield, he’d be knocking out close to 4 marathons in a row, and still wouldn’t have explored a single inch of what’s underneath it! Think about that for a minute as he would take close to 9 hours of full pelt running! It’s MONUMENTAL in size and almost every metre of it is filled with ti02.

Anyway, I digress!

@Cev - I can only dream of a 13m holding, & similarly the red days become bigger too! It’s not all one way positive traffic for sure.

A 10,000 shareholding is as important to that investor as any other. We all feel the ups and downs no matter what the overall value of those movements.

I can assure everyone here, buying 1.5m shares (my biggest single tranche in volume) back when nobody wanted to buy them wasn’t easy! But selling them at 100x will hopefully easy those memories :-)

GLA

ML

Hi Rustyrat,

I think I’m trying to be as pessimistic as possible just to avoid any negative surprises!

Losing over €1m on paper TWICE in the last 6 months is enough to age a man 10 years each time! 👴🏼

I now feel 63 as a shareholder in Empire. Hopefully the bod can knock a few years off me with the news we hope we get confirmed during 2026.

GLA

ML

Https://www.linkedin.com/posts/criticalminerals-mineralsalliance-usaustraliapartnership-share-7449333493484150784-vivU?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_ios&rcm=ACoAAAf7tiYB_f_0iCqUItGnPP3DD_AmTXPhyQA

AMEC welcomes today's announcement by Federal Resources Minister Madeleine King and Trade Minister Don Farrell, on further letters of support provided to Australian projects as part of the United States-Australia framework on critical minerals and rare earths.

In particular the $500 million letter of support from both Australian and US Governments to Ardea Resources Ltd nickel project in WA.

Other projects that have received letters of support or interest from Export Finance Australia and the Export-Import Bank of the United States under the US-Australia Framework include:

• Tronox Holdings (Australia) Pty Ltd Rare Earths Refinery Project (WA)

• Alcoa Australia's gallium recovery project (WA)

• Northern Minerals heavy rare earths project (WA)

• Global Advanced Metals project (WA)

• Astron’s Donald Rare Earths Project (VIC)

• The Latrobe Magnesium project (VIC)

• VHM Limited's Goschen Rare Earth and Mineral Sands Project (VIC)

• RZ Resources Copi Rare Earths Project (NSW)

• Arafura Rare Earths Limited’s Nolans Project (NT)

• Graphinex’s Esmerelda graphite mine (QLD)

• EQ Resources Limited Mt Carbine Tungsten Project (QLD)

AMEC congratulates all projects on receiving the letters of support and looks forward to them progressing under the Framework.

#CriticalMinerals #MineralsAlliance #USAustraliaPartnership

From LinkedIn.

Govts are prioritising large scale critical mineral projects in stable jurisdictions like WA. Support is being shown at the pre-development stage, which is exactly where Empire sits today, ok Titanium isn’t included yet, but clearly aligns with the same strategic supply chain focus, so as Pitfield advances on scale and processing, we’re positioning ourselves as a natural candidate for similar govt-backed support and funding.

ML

On the 20m employee shares ( across roughly 10 employees estimate off the top of my head), I’d imagine these are tiered where the top 3 people, the ones critical to delivery (think flowsheet, metallurgy, project execution for example) take the biggest positions. That could easily be 3m shares each. Then you’ve got experienced specialists maybe getting 2m, and the rest spread across supporting roles with circa 1m each. Of course it could be 2m flat shares each but I wouldn’t expect that as these are typically weighted towards the people who matter most to final execution.

They’re sitting in an EBT now and haven’t even been awarded yet, so no immediate dilution (roughly 3% of today’s SiC) and I think it’s vital to have employees incentivised ahead of what should be the most important phase of the project and their careers.

If Pitfield is what we hope it is, then this isn’t really dilution in any real way and more preparation for project commercialisation and delivery.

On we go!

ML

I know, I know, it’s not like me but can I offer a counter argument to all the positive comments.

Rightly or wrongly I see the RNS as neutral to mildly positive.

I criticised another company I’m in for extending options recently so have to stand over that opinion somewhat.

So 2 things; the low strike rate has been kept from when the project carried much more risk. I would argue a more balanced approach would have been to reset those strikes higher, maintaining the same relationship to the share price, now that Pitfield is significantly de-risked. That would have removed any “it’s too generous” comments which surely some people have?

However, I’m fully aware that most will say “You can’t change a deal made previously”, again I would argue that the deal has changed by extending the option. I’m also aware that AIM companies almost always extend rather than reprice to avoid rewriting the original incentive structure and keeps a degree of continuity through the key development phase.

The other key point that I haven’t seen mentioned is the cash reality behind these options. Just like when investors say “the BoD only bought £25k worth of shares” when you see a director dealing RNS, they don’t an endless pot of money and in this circumstance SB would have needed to put up £275,000 of his own money before expiration.

That’s not insignificant, especially into a project that is still Pre-PFS, pre-development and still proving processing at scale. The tax implications are also a very real world problem with RP rightly pointed out.

So without the extension, he was effectively being forced to either commit a large amount of personal capital early, or let the options lapse.

For me the extension simply removes that timing pressure and aligns his incentive with when the real value is expected to be delivered, at some point before 2028.

I will say, it does now incentivise SB to drive full value in Pitfield (Not that he wouldn’t anyway) which is the positive angle. There is absolutely no way he’s walking away from these with such an enormous opportunity to create general wealth for himself and his family.

Is that neutral to mildly positive? Not sure after reading it back 🤣

ML

In summary, Empire Metals has laid out a structured plan to transform its resource into a valuable asset. The upcoming milestones are clear, and the risks are primarily financial. Investors should monitor progress on drilling and metallurgical studies, track cash reserves and capital raises, and evaluate the potential benefits of a dual listing. Success in these areas could unlock further value, while failure to manage capital or reduce project risk may keep the share price subdued. This opportunity requires a long-term perspective, with the real value likely to emerge over the next year as the company executes its strategy.“

Article from Thursday gone.

ML

While the company has demonstrated prudent financial management, its available funds are not unlimited.

Building Value: Reducing Risk and Expanding Options

Empire Metals has outlined a clear roadmap to convert its substantial resource into shareholder value. Over the next year, efforts will focus on reducing project risk through additional drilling, metallurgical improvements, and a scoping study. The recent capital raises allow management to prioritize technical progress without immediate financial constraints.

A standout feature is the project's ability to produce high-purity titanium dioxide, achieving a grade of 99.25% via standard processing methods. This opens access to lucrative pigment markets and the possibility of entering titanium metal production, expanding the project's economic potential and competitive edge.

The initial resource estimate of 2.2 billion tonnes at 5.1% TiO₂ covers only a portion of the mineralized area, leaving room for substantial resource growth. For a company valued at £210 million, the opportunity to significantly increase contained tonnes could act as a powerful catalyst, enhancing intrinsic value without proportionally higher capital investment.

Ultimately, the company is systematically reducing uncertainty and expanding its options. Each successful technical milestone increases confidence and brings the project closer to a definitive investment decision. The combination of high-purity output and a vast, largely unexplored resource base offers the potential for exponential growth in both scale and value.

Milestones, Risks, and Investor Considerations

Empire Metals' investment outlook now centers on a series of clear milestones and risks. The main catalyst is the execution of the de-risking plan, including resource expansion drilling, metallurgical optimization, and a scoping study scheduled for later this year. Success would validate the project's economics and scale, possibly leading to a market revaluation. While the high-purity titanium dioxide is promising, further metallurgical work is needed to confirm process viability at larger scales.

The most significant risk is the need for additional funding before the project reaches commercial production. Although the company has a two-year financial runway, substantial capital will be required to advance to a bankable project. Previous fundraising has provided a buffer, but future rounds could dilute existing shareholders. This is a reality that investors must accept when considering early-stage, high-potential opportunities.

A possible dual listing on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) could serve as a secondary catalyst, improving liquidity and attracting new investors. While not central to the investment thesis, it could provide additional support if pursued.

CTD….

Sorry 14th Sept 2025.

Unfortunately, it got buried by spam posts that time. Given how this Empire forum has been reclaimed by sensible discussion over the last 2 weeks, everyone can now read and see it within a page.

Empire Metals: Premier Titanium Asset Available Below Its True Worth.

2026/04/09 06:12

By: 101 finance

“Empire Metals: Resource Scale Versus Market Value

Empire Metals presents a striking investment scenario: the company holds a vast, high-grade titanium resource, yet its market capitalization remains relatively modest. The initial JORC resource estimate for the Pitfield project marks a pivotal moment, revealing 2.2 billion tonnes at 5.1% TiO₂, equating to approximately 113 million tonnes of titanium dioxide. This discovery stands among the world's largest and highest quality deposits. Its location within a top-tier mining region near essential infrastructure reduces operational risks and suggests the potential for efficient, cost-effective extraction.

Despite this resource, Empire Metals' market cap is around £210 million. While this valuation reflects the asset's promise, calculations indicate the underlying value of the titanium dioxide far exceeds the current share price. The market appears to be discounting for possible setbacks or a lengthy timeline to realization. For investors willing to wait, this could represent a chance to acquire substantial value at a significant discount.

However, there are important considerations. The company has raised £11.5 million through two funding rounds in the past year, strengthening its cash reserves but also highlighting ongoing capital requirements. With £8.4 million in cash as of March 20, 2026, Empire Metals has a financial cushion, though it is limited. The prospect of further dilution to finance development is a real risk, making this an investment that hinges on both execution and patience.

Financial Management: Cash Flow and Capital Strategy

Empire Metals faces a long journey to unlock the full value of its resource, requiring careful financial stewardship. The company reported a £3.5 million loss for the year ending December 2025, expected given its pre-revenue status. Its annual cash burn has averaged £4.0 million, reflecting a disciplined approach to project development rather than aggressive spending.

With £8.4 million in cash, the company has roughly two years of runway at its current expenditure rate. Recent fundraising efforts have been proactive, ensuring resources are available for upcoming drilling and metallurgical work without the need for emergency capital. Management has also reduced cash burn by 8% over the past year, signaling a focus on efficiency. While the increased market cap means future funding rounds would require fewer new shares, dilution remains a concern for investors seeking long-term value.

CTD

Thanks guys,

I had found the thread (after 20 minutes of scrolling) and put my link as a reply into the original thread from Sept 14th 2024 but good to see it written out as I couldn’t do it without having to do 5 or 6 individual 70 page long searches 🥴

Teamwork makes the ……………..as they say.

ML

Have you ever tried scrolling through 70+ forum pages on a phone just to find a specific thread? It’s genuinely painful, so much pain I’d imagine there probably a far quicker way.

That said, Ageos had previously shared a really interesting discussion around potential titanium products coming out of Pitfield, not just what we know today, but what could emerge in the future, including applications we haven’t even considered yet.

Given that Pitfield is shaping up to be a genuinely multi-generational asset, potentially with a 100 yr mine life, it raises a bigger point, we simply don’t know today the full extent of what we could ultimately be supplying into global markets.

Thanks to another shareholder this morning for sharing the latest link with me. It doesn’t directly impact Empire Metals in the near term, but it does highlight the scale of the opportunity. If new technologies or processing routes become commercially viable, there’s every chance Pitfield could sit right in the middle of that supply chain.

For me, it reinforces a simple reality, we’re not looking at a finished picture here, we’re looking at the early edges of something that could evolve far beyond what the market is currently pricing in.

Enjoy the weekend.

+25% for the week

+9% for the month.

On we go.

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2026/04/08/titanium-emerges-as-a-vanadium-alternative-in-redox-flow-batteries/

ML

You’re absolutely right Cev!

And it was a question I asked SB back in February 2024. I still have my notes from that meeting and he directly said there’s no reason why we can’t target 10% - 15% of the total market by 2030.

2 years has passed from that meeting (9p at the time with 599m shares in circulation and a circa £53m MC.

We touched £266m MC today (402% increase). I see similar increases being realised over the next 2 years.

Doubt him and Empire at your own regret!

ML

In fairness to Quimada,

When we look at these established players and where they actually sit from a valuation perspective, whilst TB & Cev are correct, there are some relevant comparisons that can be made.

Turnover in multiple billions, market caps in multiple billions.

ATI I don’t think has that high a turnover IIRC but has a MC of roughly $4BRZ.MI

Chemours circa $6b turnover with MC of circa $4bn

Tronox $3b and $3b MC

Kronos $2b & $1.5b MC

All these businesses with varying levels of baggage that comes with them (energy costs, legacy assets, debt, environmental overheads) are still sitting comfortably in the $1b to $7b MC range.

From searching back on Telegram using the keyword function I had previously said the typical EBITDA margins in the pigment space can swing anywhere from 10% to 25% depending on the cycle, with P/E ratios often landing in the 8x–15x range.

Markets are obviously valuing their ability to produce consistently, their cost position on the curve, product quality (purity matters massively) and their downstream optionality which SB has mentioned is a key opportunity for us.

Now bring all that back Pitfield and we’re certainly not looking at a small, niche deposit trying to squeeze into an existing market. We’re looking at a district-scale resource, near-surface, consistent grade, simple, low-temperature processing route being proven with pigment-grade output already demonstrated at lab scale and a pathway now moving toward continuous piloting in this quarter.

That combination is exactly what the market has rewarded in those competitors above, scale, simplicity, and margin potential, but yes not fully comparable as were years back from them.

So if some people think Empire is a £200m –300m story, (not saying they have) it just doesn’t line up with how the market already values comparable businesses.

Even allowing for development risk, timeline to production and IMHO, the possible dilution along the way, we’re still benchmarking against an industry where $1b+ valuations are the norm, not the exception.

The question for me isn’t can it be a billion dollar company, the competition and industry peers already show that.

The real question is how quickly can we de-risk toward that outcome, and how much of the value chain can we ultimately capture.

All nice problems to have and another solid day for shareholders.

ML

Buyers still have opportunity here to get in below thecII’s who ploughed £7m in with presumably more detailed info than we had back then.

Some savvy investor just took £108k at 37p.

A month of slow form drip drip drip on the SP has been eroded away in less than 2 trading sessions.

The base level is strong IMO, and if we get news that materially improves of chances of commercial high grade product, well as we’ve seen before, Empire can move violently upwards. The key difference now is that it’s not about price discovery, it should be built on industry validated data and figures.

Let’s see what happens.

GLA

ML

Yeah Doc 👍🏼

Last weeks buys now circa 20% up. Bargain basement buys when the market is full of fear and negativity. It’s the best time to buy.

Onwards we go!

ML

This is a big step forward.

We’ve confirmed butane and pentane and the key point here being these are typically thermogenic, not biogenic. So basically it points to hydrocarbons at depth.

Add that to the satellite slicks, oil seeps, thermogenic data from past wells and it’s another brick in the wall of UOG.

It’s the 1st 3D seabed mapping we’ve had, so it’s far more defined and robust in terms of results.

Put all this together and it’s getting hard to argue against an active system being present.

The real value now is strengthening a farm-out. More evidence = stronger hand in bringing in a partner to fund the drilling.

Still plenty of risk but this is exactly the kind of progress I wanted to see with the PC phase.

ML