Member Info for Metalhead25

Yesterday’s RNS claimed that the raise price of 0.2p was a 16% discount to 0.28p. It is not. It is a 29% discount, as today’s RNS accepts.

So, why did yesterday’s RNS say 16%? My guess would be that the raise was planned to be at 0.235p but then the SP crashed during the day and they had to drop the raise price last minute. If this is right, any insider trading that happened yesterday inflicted double damage on holders

No idea why all my capital letters were removed, sorry for clunky-looking post!

i’m a non-holder for some time so please take my comments with an appropriate pinch of salt (/ feel free to accuse me of trying to “get in lower” although i’m not).

however, i can’t resist a comment on this idea that there must be something going on that is unknown to this bb, and that the board need to come out and announce that nothing has changed. there have been three rnss this month, from which the following are notable:

- no mention whatsoever of angloamerican (in fact, there has been near silence on that deal for many months)

- there was never an intention to do a dfs before putting hanc0ck into production, yet now that is happening - this costs money and causes delay

- the timeline to production has moved back to “2024”, which a prudent investor will read as “late 2024” - the timeline seems to move back at the same rate as the general passage of time…

- a ton of performance rights have been thrown at the board, reducing potential upside for investors

- the eagle-eyed may have noticed that one of the conditions for some of the performance rights to vest is “completion of satisfactory agreement for final payment for the han**** project” - a topic i have wondered about for some time but on which the company ignored my emails: i wonder whether many shareholders were conscious of this looming issue

- putting all of the above together, there is an obvious funding issue which, given the company is now doing a dfs and will probably not get straight debt funding before that, is surely going to mean equity or convertible debt

all of the above is derived from what has been put out by the company. admittedly there is, in addition, some uncertainty around knac’s july meeting which the board could clarify. but i don’t think that bit of uncertainty is likely to be the whole reason for the drop

Looks like practically everyone “forgot” it, might be a cynical play from the government to whip up a few quid

Well the pace of AFP’s progress in Zambia depends on First Quantum, not Colin. And FQ are not slow. Speaking of them, we’re in the zone for a Zambia quarterly update in the next few weeks, I’d have thought

Dilution is inevitable in pre-profit nanocaps, you just have to hope the terms are ok and the corresponding business progress is good. In my view OBD has ticked those two boxes

On a long term basis there’s a good argument for a purely chart-based view that the SP was around 0.1-0.2 for years until 2020 when it rocketed up, and basically it’s on a 3-4 year dwindle back down to where it used to be, with the only thing likely to arrest the decline permanently being making a profit (which seems to have been 6-12 months away for about 2 years)

Yes it’s difficult to see how the KCB licences were worth $8m if in reality the only decent bit was Karakubis. On the other hand, what POW got out of that deal was basically an interest in the KSZ and 082, so arguably in retrospect POW did worse…

As you know I’m out so pinch of salt and all that. However, I did listen to the interview and have the following thoughts:

1. Ben was very straightforward about B1. I think he has dealt with the drill well and he spoke about it well.

2. Good news if Purebond stage 2 is still on. I personally wouldn’t count any chickens on that front until the money is in. Ben previously said it wasn’t Zim that Purebond was interested in so what was it? Not the KSZ either? I don’t know if I really believe they will put the rest of the money in at 1p, but we’ll see.

3. Some comments about the KCB that made me feel sick. Basically said we didn’t have a competent geologist until Dave Catterral came on board (wtf!) and that everything we did in the KCB up to that point was seriously misguided. Implied that all the soils are Acacia, Morula, Happy etc were a waste of time, and also the 082 drill programme.

4. The Zim project has nothing to do with Paul Johnson or Michael Foster or Purebond and has not previously been explored by the Chinese. Load of nonsense written about it on here previously.

5. Karakubis to be drilled early 2024, Nara could be earlier.

Well, I sold the second the RNS appeared. This was the project I had the most hope for, the reason why I was still holding after all the previous failures, so to see not only the failure of a drill but the complete failure of the geophysics and the icing of the project spells the end for me. I don’t blame the board for my losses. What has happened is that I bought into the idea that you could use geophysics to explore effectively under the sand. I think we have now comprehensively proven that you can’t. My mistake. Or, perhaps, my gamble that didn’t pay off. Clearly it may turn out that the share prices rises back above the price I sold at, but with the KSZ dead, my assessment is that other companies are cheaper. I wish those of you who remain all the best.

Also note: “AMS and its partners have been investors and offtake partners in the HMS business over the past five years.” We shouldn’t have any problems with offtake then - excellent

A very positive update in my view, albeit with a bit more delay. Crucially, we have confirmation that our HMS product is high grade, with high value elements included within it. We also have an indication of pricing specific to our product, ie $160/t for unprocessed product and $320/t for processed. Since we have been guided 6000t per month, we can now project revenues of just under $2m per month once the separation facilities are fully up and running. That should be end of September if we’re not delayed by nuclear permitting or next summer if we are. The potential delay is a shame but (a) it’s not certain to happen, and (b) we can use the time to get everything else more fully in order, ensuring a smoother ramp up, and (c) we’re over-funded in the meantime

PS. Another way of looking at the fact that our stake reduces to 20% on a decision to mine is that we will have gotten to that point with zero dilution of our own equity. If you imagine what it would look like for a £5m market cap company to get to the same point on its own, I would say that the shareholders would be diluted at least the same amount or more by the raising of the money to fund the costs of getting to a decision to mine. So there’s ultimately dilution either way. The massive benefit of our JV arrangement is we’re not taking any of the risk!

Cyber, you’re right that if we get to a decision to mine we’re going to be holding 20%. However, if First Quantum have decided to mine it we are in my view going to be looking at a project value of $1 billion or more - quite possibly much more. Another possibility is FQ find a good copper deposit but not big enough for them. In that case, the project will be worth less but our interest will be greater. Either way, I’m very comfortable that if a viable discovery is made we will be in line for a massive profit here

I don’t follow why there would be a big drop on Monday (apart from that several of you evidently want one…)

The loss number was released a week ago on 23 June.

Great posts, Xenor.

Note how, when somebody writes something serious, it shows up the absolute state of most of the other posts on here. The childish squabbling is embarrassing.

Hi all. I’ve done a long twitter thread on AFP. Check it out: https://twitter.com/metalhead2525/status/1675019357078814721?s=46&t=Jne_cUYLxmaxpafySDDQ2A

All comments welcome

FKC “The main information missing from the debate is the identity of the vendor. Strange it has still not been disclosed despite the fact that the contract has been signed? What have KAV to gain from holding back on such basic details? It only adds to the suspicion that they are not open honest and transparent. It also leads to pointless speculation as we are now seeing.”

Serious question: have you tried asking the company / Ben who the vendor is? I’m pretty sure if I asked him he’d just tell me…

And I think the response is that that point only has any validity if it turns out “the Chinese” have recently attempted to make a go of the Nara project. That is the information missing from this debate

Given that we are a mere 6 months away from the commercial launch of a test which is going to revolutionise the diagnosis of one of the most common cancers, I’d say we’re pretty bloody good value!