Member Info for NickE

Xhita, I don’t disagree that some builds flatline through construction. But context matters a lot here. KEFI is coming into construction from a much lower valuation base, with a long-standing funding discount still priced in, which wasn’t the case at Emed or Kiziltepe.

Also, the gold price backdrop is completely different. At $4,500 gold, debt payback and equity risk are repriced very quickly, even before ramp-up. In that environment, simply removing funding and early execution risk can be enough to move the share price, without needing full operational proof. Plus of course the Saudi assets with value that potentially has parity with TK value will start to be factored in. A 30% value of an NPV at a current gold price approaching $4,500 USD is probably verging on slightly conservative (especially given Saudi value is excluded) but it still equates to 3p.

Also, some investors simply read “final lender approval still awaited” and stop there, without understanding that this is procedural. That sort of superficial read tends to drive knee-jerk selling, particularly in small caps that have a placing overhang. So there is a lot of catch up to even get to a base of fair value.

I’m not assuming value magically appears during construction, just that an unusually large discount can compress as milestones are delivered, especially once the placing stock is absorbed. After that, I agree ramp-up is what really matters.

Thanks Rob, I wondered why so many green boxed posts came up! Meanwhile gold conues to head back towards $4,500. When funding is formally "shortly" announced Kefi will have a lot of catching up with so of the developers who already have some of the rising gold price factored in.

A detailed and positive RNS. What’s left now is clearly procedural formality rather than anything fundamental. The funding structure is agreed, contractors are mobilised and Lycopodium is on site. The only step still referenced is final lender approval of the detailed equity documentation for the streams and EthioPrefs. That’s a standard project-finance formality once commercial terms are locked. If the banks were uneasy, the project wouldn’t be described as “launched” and execution wouldn’t already be under way.

KEFI also expects to retain around 83% of TKGM after government participation and the agreed funding package. That’s higher than many had assumed and supports the underlying economics.

On Saudi, the market is still assigning zero value. KEFI points to a Saudi-focused peer valued at around US$2.1bn and notes its own roughly 13% economic interest in comparable ground. No one is claiming that ($273m USD) value today, but it does put the current zero valuation into perspective. Even allowing for a heavy discount, Saudi represents meaningful upside that isn’t being recognised, and crucially it doesn’t require any additional funding. The RNS even states that Saudi is expected to reach parity with Tulu Kapi's value, which is a strong statement to make in an RNS given nomads push back against speculative claims but haven't in this instance.

Using KEFI’s own figures (excluding Saudi), NPVs at construction start are around 5p a share at $3,000 gold, about 8p at $4,000 and roughly 11p at $5,000. Against that, the current market cap still reflects a large discount. If Saudi interests do reach valuation parity then these figures can be doubled. Ambitious or over optimistic? Possibly, but zero value being factored in will obviously change going forwards

It’s also worth noting the shift in language. Previously KEFI talked about funding being “assembled”. In today’s RNS the project is described as “launched”, with execution contracts activated and work progressing on site. That’s a clear step forward.

From here it’s about execution and newsflow. Funding sign-offs are rightly described as “shortly”, not “if”. The next updates should focus on documentation completion, drawdowns and visible progress, with Saudi news to follow. Clearing the placing overhang is likely to be the key short-term factor in allowing the share price to reflect value more fairly. Times like this bring to mind Buffett’s line about markets transferring money from the impatient to the patient.

It's a done deal :-) Expecting a Monday RNS to confirm. Looks like a $30m stream in tranches. Kefi had $23m lined up from the Ethiopian bonds from the last RNS and were exploring $38m so I expect they are up to $30m from this source. Have a good weekend everyone - I don't think it's premature to celebrate!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W99hNbOAPY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W99hNbOAPY

Just a note of interest - I did a little more research on Jeremy Gray who posted in praise of Kefi on linkedin and said he "had the pleasure of spending some time with Harry Anagnostaras-Adams Exec Chairman of KEFI Gold and Copper last week to learn about his Tulu Kapi deposit in Ethiopia." It transpires he happens to head a royalty/streaming Company, Chancery Royalty, and has referenced Tulu Kapi as "now fully funded". Coincidence? I doubt it!

JG is an entrepreneur with a brilliant track record having picked up one producer, Tucano Gold, for peanuts and turned it into a $2 billion company. We all know the compelling investment appeal of Kefi on here (with the exception of a few eccentrics - polite term!) but it’s quite an endorsement to have someone of his calibre calling it the best mining project in Africa.

linkedin post:

Jeremy GrayJeremy Gray

• 3rd+3rd+

CEO Pilar Gold, Pure Tungsten, Tucano Gold & Gold RoadCEO Pilar Gold, Pure Tungsten, Tucano Gold & Gold Road

1w • 1 week ago • Visible to anyone on or off LinkedIn

Follow

I had the pleasure of spending some time with Harry Anagnostaras-Adams Exec Chairman of KEFI Gold and Copper last week to learn about his Tulu Kapi deposit in Ethiopia. It is quite clear in my mind that Tulu Kapi is arguably the best undeveloped gold project in Africa and not given the attention it deserves by the market.

Tulu Kapi is now fully funded and can now finally show its true potential as a low cost 175,000 per annum gold operation that will bring considerable employment and prosperity to this beautiful country.

Thanks as ever Rob. As I understand it, KEFI had prior applications, mapping, and historical tenure (not full license awards) that shouldn’t have been overridden.

Ethiopia has made it clear that it wants responsible, well-capitalised operators, not speculative holders. Step forward Kefi - particularly given HAA's positive relations with Govt officials plus the Govt. stakes held in TKGM which would presumably be replicated in these over-pegged licenses. Some holders have a go at him - and he's not perfect of course - but his positive high level connections and tenacity could help double the NPV or more in this context if things pan out as hoped or even anticipated.

Kefi is by far the best-positioned company in the region. It already works closely with federal and regional governments, is funding TK, has the ESG and community track record, and has the technical capacity to turn exploration into a mine plan.

What makes this interesting is the geology. TK itself is 1.72 Moz from drilling just one segment of the trend. Kurmuk, on the same regional system, is 3.4 Moz.

The Askari/Xingxu licences cover two major mineralised shear corridors, each about 8 to 10 km long, with multiple targets that have already shown gold at surface through trenching, artisanal workings, quartz veins and initial drilling. These are exactly the kind of belts where you often see multi-deposit clusters rather than isolated finds.

Obviously we can't quote any potential number with authority because nothing has been drilled to resource standard, but in geological terms these are not low-probability areas. They are the natural extensions of a proven gold system, and point to both surface and underground potential.

The main point is that the Askari licence issue could end up consolidating the district under an operator that is actually capable of developing it, and that places Kefi in a very strong strategic position for any future expansion around TK.

Just to note the 5p to 14p NPV figure flagged up by ChatGP only to 7 years of production at Tulu Kapi , not the 20-year mine life or underground expansion , saudi revenues or revenue for the multitude of other licenses Kefi has an interest in.

ChatGpt analysis:

The latest RNS is very significant for KEFI’s valuation because it confirms that the company has avoided major dilution by using gold streaming and Ethiopian Preference Shares instead of large equity injections at the project level.

Originally, KEFI needed US$100m of equity-risk capital. Only $40m was arranged, with $60m outstanding. The expectation was that a US$50m African fund might fill this gap – but that would almost certainly have reduced KEFI’s percentage ownership of Tulu Kapi.

Instead, KEFI has now:

Signed term sheets for US$40m of gold streams

Progressed US$43m of non-convertible Preference Shares

Kept the African fund option only as a backup

Crucially, neither the streams nor the Preference Shares dilute KEFI’s equity stake in TKGM.

Implications for valuation:

The company published updated economic metrics “after taking into account” the proposed streams and Preference Shares. These show:

Net cashflow (first 7 years) of US$1.2bn–US$2.7bn after all servicing

Project IRR of 107%–195% at $3,000–$5,000 gold

KEFI’s NPV (75% beneficial interest) of US$605m–US$1.682bn

NPV per share of 5p–14p at those gold prices

These figures already incorporate the financial impact of:

US$240m senior debt

US$40m of streaming

US$43m Preference Shares

So the economics remain extremely strong despite the use of streams.

Why this is better than the African fund option:

A US$50m equity investment at the project level would have diluted KEFI’s ownership (potentially down to 65–72%), which would have permanently reduced NPV per share. Streaming, by contrast:

Preserves KEFI’s ~75% stake

Preserves long-term upside

Reduces early cashflow slightly but maintains the much higher per-share valuation

Bottom line:

The RNS is very positive for shareholders. KEFI retains a high ownership percentage, avoids major dilution, and still shows an NPV of 5–14p per share — several times the current market price.

Many thanks Rob and great research as ever.

Aside from Saudi progress news then, post TK launch, newsflow should include construction updates, progress on recovering new licenses, potential JV's on existing licenses, possible new licenses and the prospect of a full listing in the new year. All in the context of what may well be the next upward leg of the gold price. Junior miners are always the last to take off and when they do they generally have the biggest upturn of the various mining categories.

Always sensible to spread investments and look for aditional opportunities but I'll be surprised if there are any as compelling as a fully funded developer trading at such a low % of an existing NPV which excludes Saudi, other licenses and the TK underground resource. As well as NPV the other key valuation factor will be that local investors will be taking a stake in TKGM valued at a multiple of the AIM parent company market cap.

The presentation on the 19th by Kefi's consultant, Patrick Chidley, suggested that a stream might be a sizeable component of the package. He cited Allied Gold (Kurmik project) doing a $175m stream with Wheaton Prescious Metals: https://www.gowebcasting.com/events/precious-metals-summit-conferences-llc/2025/11/10/kefi-gold-and-copper-plc/play/stream/41405

It would of course be non-dilutive but not 'cheap' and Ethiobonds would be the cheapest non-dilutive part of the $60m needed.

If KEFI closes the remaining 60m as roughly 30m EthioBonds, 20m stream and only about 10m of ordinary equity at TKGM level, the dilution for the AIM parent is very small. The EthioBonds and the stream do not dilute the ownership at all. The only thing that affects KEFI’s percentage is the 10m equity into TKGM.

KEFI has repeatedly guided that a fully funded Tulu Kapi carries a valuation in the region of 1.1bn to 2.7bn dollars for 100 percent of TKGM. Even if you take the very lowest end of that range, about 1.1bn, a 10m issue represents less than one percent of the project. So KEFI’s ownership, which drops from 95 percent to around 85 percent once the Ethiopian government pays for its extra 10 percent, only falls slightly further to about 84 percent.

On the NPV side, the coupon on the EthioBonds and the cost of the 20m stream might reduce TKGM’s overall NPV by around 60m to 90m dollars. After those adjustments, KEFI’s stake in TKGM still carries an NPV of roughly 770m to 875m dollars, which works out as about 8p to 9p per KEFI share on the current share count. That figure does not include any value for the underground expansion or any of the Saudi assets.

The important point is that a formal valuation for TKGM in the region of 1.1bn dollars or more gives the AIM company a very clear read-across. If KEFI owns roughly 84 to 85 percent of a billion-dollar project, then the parent company’s current market cap of only 140m to 160m pounds cannot realistically stand once the financing closes. Even with a sensible jurisdiction discount, the market normally has to adjust upwards when the subsidiary has a confirmed funded valuation.

This is also why the company said a shareholder vote may not be required. If only a small amount of ordinary TKGM equity is issued and the rest of the package comes from non-dilutive instruments, the PLC does not need shareholder approval. KEFI would still end up with about 84 percent of a fully funded mine, which is unusually high ownership for a project of this size. I think most investors, me included, would be happy with anything above an 80% stake after funding.

There seems to be confusion about KEFI saying a shareholder vote “may be unnecessary”. It suggests thatthey probably won’t use the type of equity that would have triggered a PLC vote - namely releasing subsidiary equity and reducing the stake in TKGM.

Most of that remaining $60m now looks like it’ll come from EthioPrefs and a gold stream. Both of those bring in money without diluting KEFI’s ownership of Tulu Kapi. The contractor note sits outside TKGM too. The only thing that would dilute KEFI is issuing ordinary shares in TKGM or the Ethiopian holding company.

The fact they’re now saying a vote might not be needed tells us they’re not planning anything big on that front. At most they might do a tiny bit of dilution (maybe 5% or less) which they can do without needing a vote depending on existing permissions.

So the takeaway is pretty simple: KEFI probably ends up owning roughly 80–85% of Tulu Kapi after the funding is wrapped up. In other words, very little dilution, if any, from here. That would be a very positive outcome of course.

I had an email from Alberto Alvarez (Substack) who recently wrote a fascinating 17-page report on undervalued silver stocks. In it he covers the Lassonde Curve, especially the behaviour of funded (silver) junior developers, and it’s striking how closely his framework aligns with where KEFI now sits as a junior gold developer.

The best risk–reward point in the entire mining cycle is the funded developer stage – discovery risk has gone, the deposit is economic, but first production hasn’t arrived yet. Alvarez shows that during the “boredom trough” developers often trade at 0.2–0.4 × NPV, then re-rate sharply to 1–3 × NPV once financing is secured and construction begins, especially in a rising metal price environment.

KEFI now ticks every box Alvarez highlights:

Discovery and feasibility risk fully removed (bank-level DFS, defined ore reserves)

Permits in place, government equity committed, and US$240m debt now signed

Equity risk capital oversubscribed and completing in November

Construction already mobilising (roads, power, resettlement, plant contractor on site)

At today’s gold price (~$4,200/oz), the open-pit NPV5% is roughly 10p/share. KEFI trades around 1.5p, which is barely 0.15 × NPV – about half of the 0.3 × NPV level Alvarez cites as the typical “turning point” where developers begin their re-rating phase. Figures still compelling at 10% discount.

Alvarez also notes that in strong metal markets, funded developers can trade at or even above NPV because feasibility-study costs are fixed while gold prices surge, meaning project NPV rises much faster than the market initially prices in. Developers also benefit from having no depletion drag or sustaining capital burden yet (unlike producers), and they frequently become takeover targets as majors scramble to replace dwindling reserves. When sentiment shifts from fear to greed, this stage becomes the highest-beta part of the entire mining sector.

Applying Alvarez’s numbers to KEFI at $4,200 gold:

30% of NPV (normal trough valuation): ~3p

100% of NPV (fair value in a bull market): ~10p

150–200% of NPV (Alvarez premium zone): ~15–20p

So even a move to half of NPV – Alvarez’s conservative benchmark – would still be a multiple of the current price. In strong developer bull cycles the shares often overshoot full NPV because capital pours into funded, leveraged projects as construction milestones are achieved.

If Alvarez’s historical pattern plays out, KEFI is moving from the trough to the steep re-rating leg of the Lassonde Curve at exactly the right time: fully funded, de-risked, and leveraged to a rising gold market. This is the phase where junior developers have historically delivered the largest and fastest returns. If things pan out in line with the above then Kefi delivers multiple returns from the current share price. If it doesn't then Kefi is snapped up for some sort of discount to NPV but still a multiple

GoldQueen - answering my post stating you don't use AI with a completely AI generated post starting with the Americanism 'listen up' is too funny :-) Btw, the UK spelling is 'criticise' with an s not the ChatGPT American version you have used with a z. The long hyphens are a complete giveaway as well. Anyway, it's a small point and carry on if you enjoy using it but just be honest about it.

Back to the focus on Kefi's interesting coming weeks when, all being well, we should see a substantially higher share price post gequity finance sign off. Incidentally, HAA has confirmed via an email exchange with TW that the plan is for Kefi to move to the main market. That's excellent news and, when it's done it should see Kefi achieve much higher values than would be the case on the unfavoured AIM market. Probably opens things up for more institutional investors as well.

"Listen up, NickE,

You’ve admitted you use ChatGPT for KEFI’s NPV work, so you clearly see value in AI. But you’re criticizing my post without me ever saying I used AI—you’re just assuming it. That’s not an argument, it’s speculation. If you want to challenge what I’ve written, then do it on the substance—valuation assumptions, financing risks, dividend policy—not imagined writing methods. Otherwise, it’s just a double standard: AI is fine when you use it, but suddenly becomes ‘unreadable’ when you think someone else does."

No offence GQ but I find anyone who uses ChatGPT without flagging it up and changing the U.S. spelling a bit unreadable. My advice for what it's worth is to try writing your own posts or at least edit the ChatGPT offerings a bit to tone down the AI effect. I just think that using cut and paste AI forum posts for each and every post really doesn't work well.

ChatGPT is useful especially if directed with instructions to give an impartial interpretation with the pros and cons. I use it for Kefi's NPV calculations and the appropriate discount at this stage of the finance and mine construction. It usually comes out at between 3p to 4p post finance sign off or around 30% of NPV but with the caveat the discount will narrow with a resulting double digit share price as production starts. Factors such as sentiment towards the junior mining sector will play a significant part in any narrowing of the NPV discount at this stage.

I'd agree that the main risk is a cheap takeover. It was a good piece by TW but I think his view on what shareholders might accept if an opportunistic takeover bid came soon is too conservative. The kefi share price should go significantly higher after the equity element is completed and then a takeover would have to be a decent premium on that and reflect a decent proportion of the NPV. I wouldn't envisage the lower range Tom was speculating on but who knows.

I also don't think HAA would recommend an offer (and he is in effect 'the board') unless he was guraranteed to continue to have a key and personally financially lucrative involvement. As his recent (excellent) video with Edison highlighted he is thinking five years ahead and he lives and breathes the project, potential and the country. He has come in for some stick in the past (some is reasonable) but nobody should under-estimate his tenacity, love for Ethiopia and his likely ambition to see this through to production. I don't think he is the sort of guy who will retire to sit in his armchair and watch repeat episodes of the Aussie version of Countdown.

So any takeover, with his recommendation, would likely include retaining HAA - not least because of the relationships he has forged in Ethopia with the highest level personnel and the respect he has earned. I think now he has got things over the line it's easier to give him the credit he deserves and he does deserve it. What would be a takeover price that would succeed? Realistically 4p to 5p imo if it came this year but we'll all have different views on specific prices. It would be naive to think that Kefi won't be on the warch list of one or two predators.

great rns and i'll admit a relief despite everything suggesting it was a bit of paperwork that just needed correcting.

i did like this bit: “the company has unused working capital resources and undrawn facilities in place pending drawdown of full project finance.”

i have resisted doing valuation figures for myself until this rns (i just didn’t want to tempt fate with the fairly small element of uncertainty) but asked chatgpt for an updated and conservative valuation:-

"key valuation maths (based on company disclosures and current $4,000/oz gold):

gold resource base: kefi and snowdens (2025 updates) cite a combined open pit + underground target of around 3 million ounces for tulu kapi (1.05moz open pit reserves + ~2moz potential underground extensions and satellites).

ownership: kefi 80% (ethiopian government 20%: 5% free carry + 15% paid).

recoverable ounces: 3moz × 85% recovery × 80% kefi = ~2.04moz attributable to kefi.

aisc: ~$1,100/oz (as per kefi’s own dfs guidance).

margin: $4,000 – $1,100 = $2,900/oz.

post-tax cash flow: 2.04moz × $2,900 × 0.75 (for tax/royalties) = $4.4b npv basis.

npv5% (discounted ~25% for time value): ≈ $3.3b = £2.6b.

shares in issue: 10b.

→ nav ≈ 25p/share.

developers usually trade at 20–30% of nav pre-production.

that implies a 5–8p fair range post-funding — and that’s before adding any value for kefi’s saudi assets (hawiah, jibal qutman, han**** jv).

current price: 1.5p.

even a modest re-rate to 25% of nav = 6p, a 4× from here — and a much bigger gap if gold stays over $4,000.

in summary:

$240m debt signing this week ✅

no dilution ✅

construction already started ✅

record gold price ✅

valuation gap enormous ✅

kefi is finally about to cross the line from developer to builder, and the market hasn’t caught up yet."

Wayne Smith, was the username Wayne ker already taken?

It's such a poor post that pity as opposed to irritation is the instant reaction.

Stebo, I’m hardly spreading fear when:

a) I’m posting facts – the Govt owns 20% of TKGM (5% free carry + 15% paid).

b) The implications of the likely formal TKGM valuation (as per the RNS) are clear: it sets a hard benchmark, and KEFI should trade at a multiple of the current AIM price even if the market only credits 30–40% of that valuation.

Any early predator would have to pay the full TKGM valuation plus something for the Saudi assets, which points to a share price that would be life-changing for many holders, myself included.

From today’s RNS:

“…and the issue of ordinary shares in either of the Ethiopian subsidiaries, priced on the basis of a TKGM valuation reflecting its status as a funded project.”

That’s a very important line. It means:

KEFI may issue some of the $100m ($60M in effect) equity risk capital via new shares in TKGM itself.

KEFI’s 80% stake might fall slightly (to c.75–78%) depending on how much is raised at subsidiary level.

Crucially, this equity will be priced off a “funded project” valuation for TKGM – i.e. a valuation many multiples above KEFI’s current AIM market cap.

The impact for us on AIM is that this provides a hard benchmark for Tulu Kapi’s value. Once third-party investors commit at a $1bn-plus project valuation, the market can no longer ignore the gap.

Of course, AIM won’t price it pound-for-pound. Until we’re producing, the market will likely apply a fairly steep discount – maybe only crediting KEFI with perhaps 30% to 40% of that value. But even on that basis, it still points to a share price measured in multiple pence. It also sets a benchmark for a fair takeover price as well.

In short: there's likely to be a modest dilution of the TKGM stake, but a transformational read-across that underpins a big rerating on AIM once the funding is formally signed.

Why does anyone respond rather than filter? I can understand the temptation but green boxing the pointless white noise attention seekers is my suggestion. Kefi is on the cusp of potentially life changing returns for investors in the short to medium term and bitter non-holders are irrelevant. By medium-term I mean holding to production for the potential massive gains but, fingers crossed, the next couple of months could be extremely good as well.