Member Info for MF2017

No issue**

Oops. I overlooked that. So now issue. My mistake 🤦

Thanks KEFIGOLD.

Long and strong.

I see, thanks everyone for the replies — I do understand the rationale and appreciate the points about this possibly being a better situation for shareholders.

The issue I’m raising isn’t the decision itself, but how it was handled. Why do we keep creating these own goals — saying one thing to the market, then changing it soon after? I know circumstances evolve, but surely this could have been anticipated. If the outcome depended on different equity options, why not phrase it that way from the start — e.g., “a shareholder meeting will be held if required depending on the equity structure”?

It just feels like another case of reacting rather than planning ahead. I know the team is juggling a lot, but clearer forward thinking would avoid these bumps entirely.

Good morning all.

Thanks for sharing the Q&A link on the KEFI website. My initial reaction is disappointment. While the change might make things smoother in the long run, the market had been told to expect a shareholder meeting at the end of the month. Markets dislike uncertainty, and saying a meeting might not be needed creates exactly that.

In my view, it would have been better to hold the meeting regardless — even if advised it’s not strictly necessary. What’s the disadvantage of keeping to what was promised? It would’ve been wiser to stay quiet about the change and just hold the meeting anyway. Based on the limited information I have, that would’ve been my decision-making process. It just feels like an unnecessary own goal, especially after the excellent Zurich presentation that had restored confidence.

That's a generous reply. Thanks.

So I'll be less salty.

I think we cannot judge KEFI on past performance as we are in a completely different phase.

It's similar in a way to biblical seasons and the message only applying for that time, and those still applying old messages after Christ's sacrifice and salvation have missed the point.

Did you watch the presentation KEFIGOLD found?

A lot of well established companies and consultancy firms have been used. Why This was never shown before, but glad KEFI comms are improving.

Yawn fantasy. Big yawn.

Massive financed transformational proje by KEFI.

Fantasy... poor deramp attempt.

Brilliant link KEFIGOLD. I watched the hole presentation and downloaded slides for deep look through. Very helpful and ego boosting 😃

Alanos is a long term valued contributor to the board IMHO. No need to throw personal slurs. Exchange ideas.

Totally agree with you, GoldQueen. I get why Tom frames it narrowly — Hot Stock Rockets is built around shorter time windows, so it makes sense. Still, he’s held some KEFI for a couple of years, and selfishly, I hope it stays in his portfolio. His updates help fill that information gap between RNSs and the usual “paid promoter” noise — and it’s nice having a quick, digestible take on what’s going on.

On the takeover point — curious how others see it. If KEFI were approached, would you take shares in the acquiring company and hold, or would you cash out? I’ve just been through a takeover in another holding (Warehouse REIT), and the decision-making was… interesting. Always good to hear how others think through that kind of situation.

I will agree it's a risk for LTH. Perhaps, my inclination for it being unlikely is partly my wishful thinking - i will concede that.

But the actual mechanics and execution is still a challenge to a takeover in my view. Waiting for KEFI to get back to me on the mechanics.

I don’t want to sound like I’m dodging or backpedaling, but my original point was that a takeover looks unlikely mainly because of KEFI’s relationship network — and even Tom Winifrith acknowledged that before flipping it to say that’s a negative for long-term holders. His view was that a takeover could become easier if Harry were offered a role by whoever’s making the bid.

So yes — without those relationships, a takeover would be difficult. And that’s where the real risk lies for long-term holders: Harry wins either way, with or without one.

What I do find encouraging is the talk of a potential move from AIM to the main market. That would make any buyout even less likely — and as I mentioned before, most takeovers happen before financing anyway.

Some argue “just buy KEFI plc” — but I don’t think it’s that simple. Tom suggested we’d only see around 3 p in that scenario. I hope he’s wrong. Even during construction, that would feel deeply discounted given the direction Harry’s laid out and the institutional backing now in play.

Has anyone listened to Tom Winifred’s ShareProfits BearCast yesterday?

He’s sounding noticeably softer on Harry — almost like past sins are forgiven — and now talking about an exit nearer 4p+ instead of 3p. He said the 11p figure only holds if gold stays around $4,000/oz for the life of the mine, which he doesn’t see as realistic.

From the way he spoke, I don’t think he’s looking to exit this year — if things go roughly to plan, I can imagine him keeping KEFI in his portfolio a while longer, which to me feels like good news.

He finished with a note of caution that caught my attention.

I’ve messaged Roger about that specific point and will share his reply if I get one.

Curious to hear how others interpreted Tom’s analysis — was it fair?

Yep. Defo!

Appreciate the productive dialogue, CrazyTowner. I’ll take it from your reply that you have a strong conviction there’s a realistic chance of a takeover.

For my part, I’ll do some more homework and reach out to KEFI directly to ask how easy a takeover would actually be in structural terms. Not whether they’d accept one — that’s clearly business-sensitive — but how feasible it would be in practice, given the consortium, the government involvement, and the debt structure already in place.

As a long-term shareholder, I think that’s a fair question to ask, because if the company were easily taken over, that would affect my hold decision. My point all along hasn’t been that it’s impossible — it’s that it’s highly unlikely, and even more unlikely to happen before we reach production.

I just think some of the assumptions about “just buying out KEFI PLC” gloss over the complexity involved. I mean that sincerely, not critically — I appreciate you expanding on your view and laying out your reasoning.

Anyway, I think this is one where we’ll just have to see how it plays out. Thanks again for the thoughtful exchange.

Feel free to green-box me if that’s the case, SB.

Having read some of the replies, it’s clear a few posters are showing their hand — they’d rather see a takeover than have the patience to watch TK come to life and KEFI deliver on the vision Harry outlined in his last interview.

Cashier’s point about bigger miners having plenty of free cash flow completely misses the issue. The question isn’t who has the cash, it’s how feasible a takeover actually is. And that’s where things get messy — and extremely difficult — a fact a few posters conveniently ignore.

How long do people really think the paperwork for a takeover would take? Some even suggest it could happen before production. That’s not sober analysis; that’s wishful thinking.

I’ll leave it there. If anyone wants to keep trading insults, feel free. If not — green-box me.

Thanks for the reply, CrazyTowner — I do see your point. Without trying to sound repetitive, the point I was making was that those suggesting a takeover make it sound like it’s an easy thing. It isn’t. It would take time, layers of approval, and complex re-papering. Therefore, I see it as highly unlikely.

And Sharezy — I don’t wear knickers, I wear big-boy pants. Hence my massive shareholding in KEFI. I’ve done my homework, grasp the fundamentals, and you seem to acknowledge none of it. Nothing more to say to you.

For context, I’ve looked into recent takeovers. The only vaguely comparable cases were Cardinal Resources (Ghana) — taken over by Shandong Gold in 2020 — and Orca Gold (Sudan), bought by Perseus in 2022. Neither were AIM-listed, and both were acquired before project finance or construction had started.

There isn’t a single AIM example in the last five years of a frontier-market, multi-lender, government-involved project being bought out once debt was already signed and construction ready. The pattern is clear: majors move before finance is locked, not after.

So while a friendly bid isn’t impossible, it would be slow and require government and financier consent. That makes a fast or hostile buyout highly unlikely.

For me, that’s why the takeover talk is nonsense — it’s a distraction. I’d rather we put it to bed than keep peppering the board with it. Everyone’s free to speculate, but from sober analysis, I see it as both highly unlikely to be accepted by Harry and the team and highly impractical for a large miner at this stage to make an offer.

🤷‍♂️🍻

You opened with an insult instead of an argument — that says plenty.

I’m not “highly strung,” just frustrated by the constant swings from imminent placing to imminent takeover.

I get that KEFI’s had a dramatic past, but can the drama queens please take off the wigs, kick off the high heels, and just have some balls and some patience? Of course everyone’s entitled to an opinion here — I’m just challenging with sober analysis. It’s not emotion; it’s evidence.

It just feels like a lot of gut feelings being thrown around — and most of them sound like farts that just need letting out.

It’s taken a decade to get financing this far; a buyout would take years, not weeks.

We clearly listened to different interviews — and that’s fine. I’ll stick to facts, patience, and the long-term cash-machine view.

CrazyTowner, I get why you’d call it a prime target — debt signed, low AISC, strong grades, and near-term production. On the surface it looks buyable.

But possible vs practical are very different things. Any change of control over KEFI plc would still have to pass through a maze of host-government, lender, consortium, and offtake consents. In frontier jurisdictions, those aren’t tick-boxes — they’re political and relational, built on years of credibility. That’s exactly what Harry was describing in the interview: KEFI’s relationships are part of the asset, and you can’t just “acquire” those overnight.

My take from today’s interview is that the posture isn’t dress for sale — it’s build a mid-tier operator across Ethiopia and Saudi. The lithium and other mineral comments confirmed that growth mindset. Could a major still make an offer? Sure. But there’s no signal that KEFI wants or would even entertain one.

What makes you feel the consents and governance pieces wouldn’t be a gating factor here? That’s where I think the “easy takeover” theory runs out of road.

I’ll be doing some homework — checking the last five years of AIM mining takeovers, especially those with multi-party financing in frontier markets, to see how they really played out. My hunch: few, slow, and messy.

If a major wanted exposure, a joint-venture or staged farm-in with KEFI as operator would be the lower-friction route every time.

Happy to agree we disagree. If a credible bid ever shows up, we’ll all find out at the same time. Until then, I’m focused on drawdown, execution, build — and the massive re-rate that follows.

Just to be clear, I’m not your financial advisor, and I don’t work for KEFI. I’m just a long-term investor who actually listens to the interviews and reads the RNSs.

Now, about this takeover obsession — seriously, where’s it coming from? We had an absurd fixation with a “surprise placing” that never happened, and now we’ve replaced it with an equally absurd fixation on a “buyout” that isn’t going to happen.

Let’s add some facts. The Ethiopian government isn’t just “involved” in Tulu Kapi — it’s a direct partner and shareholder in the KEFI-led consortium. Their investment, regulatory support, and banking approvals are all tied specifically to TKGM, not to some hypothetical version of the mine that could just be handed over to a different operator. You can’t just swap KEFI out and expect Ethiopia to nod it through.

As for the question about whether there’d be a shareholder vote on any takeover — honestly, I don’t know. One would assume there’s some form of obligation under AIM or UK takeover rules, but like most AIM companies, PIs’ votes would likely be outweighed by larger holders anyway. And to be frank, I don’t know why you’d expect me to have that answer — if you really want a definitive explanation, contact KEFI directly and ask Roger. He’s always been responsive when I’ve emailed him.

So to those convinced there’s a takeover coming:

Where’s your evidence?

What’s it based on — a filing, an RNS, or just a rumour recycled through the echo chamber?

Because unless you’ve seen something stronger than a gut feeling (or, more likely, a fart you’ve mistaken for one), it’s time to stop spreading noise and start focusing on the real milestones: execution, drawdowns, and delivery.

There's not going to be a takeover. Its like tge deranged deramper puppets on about placing.

Come on people....where is any evidence?

Nonsense!!!!

CrazyTowner, DV Harrison — here’s a friendly nudge: the idea that KEFI Gold & Copper plc is just waiting to be snapped up by a major miner in Ethiopia doesn’t stand up. Did we watch the same Edison interview with Harry? He gave vision and a fuller picture very different from your unreasonable buy-out notion.

Firsy, KEFI is deeply embedded in Ethiopia’s mining infrastructure, legal framework and finance structure – it isn’t a disposable junior. They have relationships you can't just buy as Harry described the depth of trust in KEFI.

Harry flagged multi-commodity ambitions: lithium, gold and other minerals in both Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia. That means the story is expansion, not exit.

The Ethiopian government holds key rights (free-carry, licences, extensions) that make a simple takeover hugely complex – this isn’t Australia or Canada.

So yes, if you’re a long-term holder like me, it’s worth owning millions and millions of shares and staying the course. The buy-out narrative? I believe it’s nonsense.

KEFI’s role has become integral to how Ethiopia brings foreign investment into mining. That’s the opposite of a buyout target — that’s a long-term development partner.

It's almost like a subtle de-ramp....why??? What on earth suggests takeover?