Member Info for Mumbles2021

The 3 shareholders are not being asked to do anything. As long as they are working together controlling over 50% of the holding they are doing the asking. With the exception of accepting a takeover offer or authorising more shares requiring the agreement of 75% of all the shareholders and an EGM. Without an EGM any dilution will be limited to the already authorised shares. However, this does not preclude the sale or partial sale of limited liability entities held by the HZM holding company. That not needs to be approved by the board and shareholders of asset company.

Until such time as an EGM is announced, then any financial and or shareholding restructuring is limited to the Asset Companies.

I might add, i aint selling with this news

Pickledpeck, to certaion extent i agree, points to consider is that the loan has a maturity of 102 months from 7th December, which is 8.5 years. also infers that this part of the deal was signed 3 weeks ago. it also infers that that they ARE GOING TO FINISH IT, if the loan doesnt come due until part way through 2031. however the intrest payable on it assuming a rateable amortization from 18 months from now would rbe in the region of 13.5 million, ie a cash flow hit of just over 5 million per annum, even though 15%, its not an unreasonalbe hit on the cash flow. the intrest refelcts the risk that the finance guys are putting on the loan compard otherpotential projects they have on their books.

the banks havent foregone intrest they have deferred payment of intrest, intrest will be incurred on the intrest payment due, plus the outstanding loan. this stil helps and adds to availabl cashflow ending the funding package being in place

The fundamental is that none of the cormerstone investors would have put a cent in, or the bank declared a delay interest payments unless there was a much greater than even chance of sorting the finance out before the end of February (which is presumably when the next interest payment is du)e , and also having more than an inkling on a road map as to how they were going to do it. This bodes well for the prospect of the mine being completed. However, it gives no indication of what the shareholding structure will be when they have sorted it out, and consequently how other Investors will fare compared to the 3 major shareholders.

And this morning 5% up. Yesterday was obviously someone close if out a position. Doesn't take much to move this SP one way or the other.

There are modifications to the plant at both Saltend and Longonjo. I know that doesn't answer your question definitively. but reasonable assumptions can be made from that.

THEO, WELCOME BACK WE MISSED YOU. THANK YOU FOR REPOSTING, BECAUSE THAT IS STILL VALID

My apologies DP, it has moved, it is down 2.5%

Todays post on RBW and Techmet, "TechMet, which is backed by the DFC, will take out an option to acquire a direct equity stake in Phalaborwa, where Rainbow is processing gypsum from dumps to produce some of the most important rare earth metals.", This is an Option!!!!!, and you are saying it is comfired funding, yet the SP hasn't moved..... get your own facts right before casting aspersions on others

It would help if you were very careful what you say. i was there and have a transcript of the proceedings. I have no problem using my real name as I do elsewhere. i authorised it from my own notes.

SP/DP, the only fact here is that your comments are irrelevant. i pass on information that is believed to be, and is correct at the time it is disseminated. What readers do with that information and how they use it to inform the decisions they make is entirely up to them. i have had to put up with you taking every opportunity to snipe at opinions on Pensana that are made on just about every platform you can find. even poisoning the Hive, which, until you started spouting, I saw as an interesting and well-curated platform. I could do an in-depth critique of the US investment in RBW that you pertain to and the potential dilution that it could entail which explains the lack of movement on the SP. but I don't, because I have no shareholding and consequently no interest. Although, unlike you, I wish all the shareholders well with their investment, As the growth potential for NdPr is expected to be 20KT a year by 2030, the green transition will need all the Ndpr they can get.

SP/DP I don't care whether you believe me or not, I was physically there

They have agreement for the offtake with a Japanese buyer. However, they will not be signing any formal documents with them until the finance terms are in place. This is because the agreement is 2 way, with an obligation from the buyer to take but also for PRE to supply. The agreement is CAP and Floor on pricing, with a take or pay obligation on volumes from the buyer . The 3 part structured finance agreement will be signed and in place early in Q1 , the ASWF equity portion being accessible immediately with draw down from the ABSA and Multi lateral development bank being permitted once CPs such as the off-take agreement have been satisfied. The same off-taker is taking the MREC from Longonjo as for the Oxide from Saltend. The contract converting from one to the other when the product comes available.

Earthworks and civil works are just different phases of a construction project and subject to the same engineering as any other stage of the project. As the engineering has only just been completed, the earthworks can't have started before hand. The previous comment clearly referred to earthworks in respect of the construction camp. The civil works involve pouring concrete driving piles. This can't be done until the earthworks are done. For me there is no ambiguity or open to Interpretation.

Earthworks is pert of the construction phase. Presentation has construction starting in December (assuming both the 6 months duration and May completion for Earthworks are correct)

Spike501, i think that is a little naive. if they hadn't stepped down, the 3 shareholders had the required votes to fire them. They also have the required votes to impose an interim executive team which they have done. the cornerstone investors have taken over total control of the board and therefore the company. Paul Smith is definitely a Glencore-acceptable shoo-in. from the company's perspective, this development is positive. I'm not sure from a PI

As pointed out, over 50% of the shareholders must agree for directors to be sacked and replaced. As there was no EGM called, all three cornerstone investors (including Orion) must have worked together to create the required shareholding vote. Other than that, there are several options open to them. So, there is no point in speculating.

Calculating. Until news on financing comes through nothing is happening.

On the plus side no reason to sell, and every reason to hold. If the RNS are accepted at face value. the DD (both commercial and technical) will be signed off and "REPORTED ON" before the year end.

Are Earther, Essentially 100% capital allowances, ie not added to the balance sheet. ie 250 million * 25% = $62.5 million of tax credits!!!, certainty assists big time when considering the affordability of any debt repayments

Publican, it's not negative either, it just re-iterates what has been said in the RNS. which is what it should do.

HeresHopin, according to the covenants, the bank has no obligation to provide any more funding. But in my experience, they tend toward pragmatism when protecting a 200 million investment already made. I wasnt suggesting that they would continue the funding of construction, but if there was a likelihood of them getting their money back, a trickle feed may be agreed to maintain the already installed kit and safety considerations. To be clear, this is entirely at the bank's discretion.