Member Info for moneyhawk

It does look a postive move, appears to be a decent prospect. Although at this stage I think I'd rather see more detail and full funding in place for the planned drill over new leases being snapped up.

At least the plan is now starting to become a bit clearer.

I see the only time line given at the moment is H1 rather than Q1/starting in Q1. Being adjacent to the Dalton highway, could they have found a suitable location and this is being planned as a spring/summer drill without needing Ice roads rather than a winter drill? May have quite an impact on cost reductions. Does look more and more like we're going it alone and not farming out for this.

The last time discounted shares were offered to us private investors, there was low uptake and it still went out to II's to fill the remainder afterwards. I can understand why its not been offered to PI's again, waste of time really.

The thing is, if we're now planning to be going it alone and drilling in 2023, this statement is plainly wrong:

"Following completion of the proposed Placing, the Company will have sufficient cash to fund its ongoing working capital requirements and general and administrative overheads for at least 12 months."

13.53 - it is a pretty big thing to leave out by accident and not mention in at least one of the two announcements. Although having looked back through, can't see it mentioned in the 10 Aug interim report or July Quarterly report either. Last mention I can see is the 27th June update you've quoted. It was because of that June annoucement I was expecting to see something about the farmout progress when we got a resource update, even just a simple one liner to say its on-going.

How this drill being planned for will be funded is very material, no doubt we'll have an update soon one way or another.

May have missed it, but can't see any mention of a farmout in these announcements.

Placing isn't enough to go it alone on a drill, funds to be used for long lead items required for 2023 drilling. I'd have thought if all potential fo partners had walked away, this would be spun as continuing with a planned farm out, not just stop mentioning it. Would have thought explaining how drilling will go ahead is a pretty critical piece of information for the placing. Perhaps in advanced negotiations now, working under a clause to not say anything?

15.26 - The reference to AOGCC giving instructions about the drill depth did catch my interest as well.

Would they have wider access and knowledge of other drill data than each explorer has? Just wondering how and why they would be arriving at a decision to give someone instructions on this rather than leave it to the explorer to make the call. The update reads like PANR believe there is more oil further down, they could have drilled deeper but they've been told to stop. Possible is a result of Icewine 1 and 2 drills, maybe some anyalsis from us known by the AOGCC but not PANR on what the pressure at the HRZ will do to the rest of the zones?

To be fair, they are technically correct. We’ve not produced a spoonful of oil, production is being measured by barrels, and I don’t think we’re using spoons to extract it either.

As for why we didn’t explore more at the current focus, it just seems to be a simple case that other prospects looked better at the time. Results at our other locations and PANRs progress has obviously changed that now, but easy to judge with hindsight of course.

Finding it amusing this is moving on the back of neighbours doing all the hard work, and which we haven't had to pay the costs for. Its just a pity Great Bear couldn't finish the job years ago, might have saved us a fortune in drilling costs on wildgoose chases across the northslope.

Struggling to understand the latest band of negative posters, and why they're so unhappy that a 2nd explorer (us) might possibly help prove up the prospect on panr acreage, and make the whole thing more attractive for bigger investment.

And I can't really understand the line being put forward that 88e is overvalued becasue of hypothetical 90:10 split on what panr have found. That's actually saying panr is overvalued. Take a look at MCaps, its roughly 90:10 split. Ergo, if 88e massively overvalued, so is panr. According to panr supporters who just seem to have a chip on their shoulder without being able to look at the bigger picture. And thats before you take into account other potential reserves on 88e alaskan acreage and production/cash generation at longhorn. Longhorn might not be producing much or have the the barrels we hope might be under our alsakan acreage, but its more than producing nothing.

19.02 - As frustrating as it is, I am more optimistic about Icewine 3 to look for conventional than I was about Merlin 2 (or whatever it'll be called). At Icewine we have plenty of data from Icewine 1&2, it could be the panr results are the final piece of the jigsaw that was needed to move forward with some certainty. It sounds a lot more plausable than chasing leads based on old 2d seismic and pointing to other discoveries near by.

The XCD leases provided some new options just when it was all starting to look a bit dire, and bought some new investment. Possibly that investment kickstarted the interest on OTC, which has certainly helped us to raise funds since. The timing of new US based investors coming on board and an OTC listing taking off is very coincidental.

The biggest gripe I have is Winx. Yes cheap, but unnecessary at the time and it backfired. And was the start of moving west away from Icewine instead of progressing leads Icewine 1&2 had found.

But I guess the $m question is whether anyone else would have done it differently, and if we would have had the data to get the right spot for Icewine 3 without knowing what panr had found.

When did the sp go from 4p to 0.3p in 2021? I remember it being the other way around. I suspect many peoples tax returns also remember this.

19.36 & 23.43 - The RNS from the previous week to that one might be more relevant to what we're looking at now?

https://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/88E/01698345.pdf

The map in the latest news is indicating a depth of around 7,500'. There's comentary in this 2015 RNS of 4,000' to 4,400', but also mentions upto 8,500'.

From 21 Dec 2015:

The HRZ remains the primary target at Icewine and results to date are encouraging for the play in
the project area, although full evaluation will not be complete for several months. Additionally,
preliminary petrophysical analysis of the logs acquired in the intermediate section from 3,500’ –
8,500’ are encouraging for Brookian conventional potential at Icewine#1 and across the
leasehold.
For example, one of several conventional zones of interest in the Brookian sequence at
Icewine#1 extends from approximately 4,000’ to 4,400’ and comprises a series of three stacked
fine grained sandstone to siltstone sequences within the Schrader Bluff Formation. The
sequences range from 61’ to 110’ in gross thickness with net:gross ranging from 78% – 100%.
The average porosities of the clastic sequences are within the range of 18% - 19% with peaks of
up to 28% porosity. Preliminary petrophysical analysis supports oil saturations in these sandstone
units above 60% and up to 75%. Hydrocarbon shows whilst drilling this interval encountered mud
log gas shows comprising predominantly C1 and minor oil shows, likely due to the fact that this
interval is not within closure.
The commercial implications of these hydrocarbon bearing Brookian sandstones will be fully
investigated following the completion of the well. The indications of significant volumes of oil in
the system and excellent reservoir are highly encouraging on a regional basis. The challenge is
now to find the oil within closure on the Project Icewine leasehold, which requires 3D seismic.

Can't say this RNS comes as much of a surprise, it makes sence to be looking at our acreage where PANR results suggest we're going to have oil.

But I can't pretent to not be a little annoyed/unhappy with the reference to Icewine 1. Years of buying up acreage, scatter gun drilling over the northslope with no success, and now we're told that re-evaluatuion of Icewine 1 shows better reservoir quality and indicators of greater amounts of hydrocarbons than at Alkaid 1.

Granted we were looking at the HRZ deeper down with Icewine 1 & 2, but what exactly did baker hughes do for us when all the analysis we were told about said the hydrocarbons were bitumen at this location. Is it really the case no one thought to look at what the drill samples say about conventional, and options to carry on at this known location instead of unknowns at Winx, Charlie, XCD leases?

But can't change the past, onwards to next year, fingers crossed.

15:41 - Just seen the news, can't help but think the same. Also can't help thinking how ironic it'd be if Yukon is the only viable prospect we have, and its the only one where we've not done any drilling.

Didn't pay too much notice of this drill, largely sold out in the rampathon last year, but kept some. Even still, had my fingers crossed we'd get the right spot this time.

Can't read too much into the RNS, but rather sounds like that could be it for Peregrine in the short term, onto Harrier or back to Icewine next drilling season. Just hope they apply for the permits earlier and are ready sooner than this year.

8.15 - A weather advisory for the area. But not sure this sounds like a severe storm panr mention. Perhaps they're just being overly cautious and could benifit from corporal jones in their camp.

https://forecast.weather.gov/showsigwx.php?warnzone=AKZ203&warncounty=AKC185&firewxzone=AKZ203&local_place1=2%20Miles%20NE%20Prudhoe%20Bay%20AK&product1=Winter+Weather+Advisory&lat=70.3075&lon=-148.6104#.YjwsuOfP2Uk

...WINTER WEATHER ADVISORY NOW IN EFFECT UNTIL 4 PM AKDT FRIDAY...

* WHAT...Blowing snow with low visibility occuring. Plan on
difficult travel conditions. Visibility will be one half mile or
less at times. East winds gusting to 40 mph will cause blowing
and drifting snow.

* WHERE...Central Beaufort Sea Coast.

* WHEN...Until 4 PM Friday.

* ADDITIONAL DETAILS...Winds gusting to 40 mph will cause
blowing and drifting snow. Cold wind chills as low as 50 below
zero will cause frostbite in as little as 10 minutes to exposed
skin.

Thats good news, but might also explain why we’re dropping when there’s no bad news. Big storm in the area, they’ve suspended their flow test

I don't expect to see BP coming back to alaska, but its not inconceivable that many oil companies are now reconsidering where they will be putting funds for exploration. Alaska may suddenly be looking a much safer and more attractive option than it was just last week. Couldn't be a better time for some decent drill results, might actually generate a farmout to a genuine tier 1 company this time, fingers crossed.

That seems to answer some of the questions about plans for the kabwe tailings and how much cobalt we might be producing.

Table on page 14:
Kabwe tailings - the current plan now looks like nothing next year, and then zinc only from 2023 to 2025. Lead and Zinc from 2026 onwards. Capex costs to mainly come in two phases, next year and then again in 2025. Vanadium TBC. (a random 49.9 Mlbs of V appears in the table for 2022, assume thats a mistake, no revenue is expected for kabwe further down the table)

Cobalt - 5.3kt of cobalt hydroxide per year from 2024. Contains approx 20% cobalt, which WHI expect we'll recevied 80% of the price for the contained cobalt. I make that to be the equivalent of 848t of cobalt per year

Jonah 09:04 - There are a few mentions in the full report
https://jubileemetalsgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Jubilee-Annual-Report_WEB-1.pdf

But I think zinc/lead/vanadium is very much taking a back seat to copper, and copper resources now dwarf the Kabwe tailings. I did think quite a while ago it would be a choice of copper or zinc/lead being produced at sable, but not both at the same time unless additional circuits are built.

As much as the environmental aspects are important, it will come at a cost (less earnings or additional plant costs). Rapid expansion has to be paid for, zinc/lead will come later, the focus for now is what will produce the most cash in the shortest time. I have little doubt that if copper prices took a huge tumble and zinc/lead became more valuable, we'd make the switch pretty quickly at sable.

I also remember that when CB/LC appeared the most optimistic about Kabwe was when vandadium prices spiked. After that spike, their focus switched to copper deals instead of getting on with the kabwe tailings. It does make me wonder whether the zinc/lead tailings are really that viable to process without high V prices.