Member Info for noix

The US listing approval is clearly good news but this sentence is also very important:

"Following the receipt of consistent gallium results from the 2025 drilling campaign, the Company has initiated metallurgical test work for gallium extraction and recovery. "

2.535 million.

Yes, it was a sell.

Apols my bad :)

Jennings hasn't sold any.

If you compare the 3rd February rns to this evenings the total voting rights have increased to 374,682,301.

Komakino

I believe it's fair to say that hxulcoirdoh will pay out straight away :

"Anyway as I believe I'm on a roll betting that SAVE will not meet expectations I offer a double or quits.

I bet that SAVE will be suspended again/as usual at the end of June 2026 for failing to publish their YE 2025 accounts.

Are we feeling lucky? Would you take that bet?"

He's not a patch on Dirty Harry.

Must say it's very strange to believe that SAVE would advise that an auditor had been appointed, if one hadn't been.

It comes as little surprise that SAVE and their advisors are a tad more in tune with the regulations than our de-ramping crew,

I don't believe it's that.

My understanding is that the shares in issue has more than doubled and they were only due for admission at the earliest today and no later than 4th March.

Does this not suggest that they have reduced :

"Previous % of voting rights attached to shares as at 20 February 2026 was 5.47% (1,117,444 shares)."

Apologies the last line of part 1 did not copy across

"takeover rules focus heavily on control via acquisition, not ongoing participation in fundraising."

❌ All exploration funding becomes Purebond’s responsibility

❌ No equity market liquidity

❌ Harder to raise project-level capital later

For a junior explorer — especially one advancing multiple projects — keeping a listing is essentially outsourced fundraising infrastructure.

Think of it like:

AIM = optional co-investors when risk appetite exists.

⛏️ 2) Zimbabwe assets + listed vehicle = strategic leverage

Kavango’s project mix (Botswana + Zimbabwe) makes a public listing useful.

Why?

✔ Credibility with governments and partners

A listed entity:

publishes audited accounts

follows governance rules

looks less like a private speculative vehicle

That matters when negotiating licences or JV structures.

✔ Future asset monetisation

If they discover something significant:

spinning out a project

dual listing

bringing in a strategic partner

…is far easier inside a listed structure.

💰 3) Purebond already has control without paying a takeover premium

This is a subtle but huge financial incentive.

Right now Purebond:

✅ Controls the board direction

✅ Controls voting outcomes

✅ Benefits from upside

…but has not paid a takeover premium for minority shares.

Taking the company private would require:

offering a premium to minorities

committing more capital upfront

From a capital-efficiency perspective:

They already have economic control — why spend more cash?

📈 4) A listed valuation can become a future exit route

For a strategic backer, a public listing creates optionality:

If projects succeed → market cap rises

Purebond could sell down small portions over time

Or use shares in future deals

Private ownership removes that flexibility.

This is very common in resource juniors:

👉 Majority shareholder treats the listing as a long-duration option.

⚖️ 5) Minority float still serves a purpose

Even with ~67% held:

Remaining free float provides price discovery

Liquidity allows new investors to enter

Market sentiment can drive valuation without Purebond funding everything

In other words, minorities help maintain a market ecosystem around the asset base.

🧠 6) The “controlled listed company” model

What Kavango looks like now is a classic AIM structure:

Not fully independent

Not fully private

…but:

A strategically backed listed shell for exploration assets.

You see similar setups with cornerstone investors in early-stage mining — especially where a sponsor wants exposure but doesn’t want full operating risk on their own balance sheet.

🧾 Short version

Purebond probably hasn’t taken Kavango private because:

✅ AIM provides ongoing access to capital

✅ Listing helps with project credibility and partnerships

✅ They already have control without paying a takeover premium

✅ Public shares give optional future liquidity or exit routes

✅ Keeping minorities invested spreads risk

🧠 3) The bigger picture — why Kavango allows this

This actually tells you something strategic about the company:

Purebond (linked to the Kansagra family via Solai Holdings) appears to be a long-term sponsor.

Kavango has essentially been funded via equity rather than debt — CEO even highlighted the zero debt structure enabled by Purebond backing.

In junior mining terms, this is very typical:

👉 Think of Purebond less as a “normal shareholder”

👉 and more like a private sponsor using AIM as a capital market wrapper.

⚠️ 4) What this means as an investor (important nuance)

Since you’re a very market-aware investor, I’ll add the part most people miss:

Pros

✔ Funding risk lower — major shareholder keeps writing cheques

✔ Strategic alignment — projects can progress without constant placings

Cons

⚠ Free float is small → liquidity issues

⚠ Minority shareholders have limited influence

⚠ Future placings may continue to favour the cornerstone investor

This structure is closer to a controlled company than a widely-held AIM explorer.

🧾 Simple summary

Why Purebond has 67% without a takeover bid:

👉 It funded Kavango through placings, subscriptions, loan conversions and underwriting.

👉 Shareholders likely approved Rule-9 waivers (“whitewash”), allowing ownership above 30% without a mandatory offer.

👉 Stakes grew through new share issuance rather than a takeover of existing holders.

If you like, I can also explain something that’s not obvious at first glance:

👉 Why Kavango hasn’t been taken private yet — despite Purebond already effectively controlling it.

There are some interesting strategic reasons tied to AIM listings and Zimbabwe projects that many investors overlook.

Go on...

Great — because this is actually one of the most interesting parts of the Kavango Resources plc / Purebond Limited story.

On the surface it does look odd:

👉 Purebond controls ~67%

👉 So why not just buy the rest and delist?

There are some very practical strategic reasons why keeping Kavango on AIM probably suits them better than owning 100%.

🧭 1) AIM is acting as their financing vehicle

This is the biggest reason.

Even though Purebond has majority control:

AIM gives access to external capital when needed.

Placings can be done into the market rather than Purebond funding everything.

If they took Kavango private:

I was intrigued by the Zengas post re Purebond's substantial holding in Kavango Resources and the fact that a takeover wasn't triggered or sought by the Company.

After fruitlessly digging around I contacted a serious and knowledgeable poster over on ADV*N, who I remember used to hold KAV.

The mechanics of what he found using A1 are certainly relevant to the debates we have had on here, so many thanks to someuwin.

Good question — and you’re absolutely right to notice that 67% ownership normally would trigger a takeover bid under UK rules.

The reason it hasn’t is down to how Purebond built its stake and what AIM takeover rules allow. Let me walk you through it clearly.

🧭 1) How Purebond ended up with 67% of Kavango

Kavango Resources plc

Purebond Limited

Purebond didn’t suddenly buy shares in the market — it effectively funded the company over several years, and its stake grew through:

✅ Repeated placings & subscriptions

Purebond has repeatedly underwritten or subscribed to fundraises.

Example: it subscribed for over 111m shares in a £2.2m placing in 2025.

It also underwrote earlier bookbuilds and funding rounds, taking large chunks of new shares.

✅ Convertible loans / financing

Purebond has provided funding via loan notes that could convert into equity.

✅ Maintaining its % in future fundraisings

A key clause gave Purebond rights to participate pro-rata so it could avoid dilution — meaning its ownership kept increasing as others didn’t follow money.

👉 The result is what you see today:

Purebond owns ~67.62% of the company.

So this wasn’t a hostile takeover — it’s basically a strategic backer funding a junior explorer that needed capital.

⚖️ 2) Why they didn’t have to make a full takeover bid

This is the key regulatory point.

Normally in the UK:

👉 Crossing 30% voting rights triggers a mandatory offer under the Takeover Code.

BUT AIM companies can use an important exemption:

🟢 “Whitewash” / Independent shareholder approval

If shareholders approve certain placings or subscriptions, a large investor can increase above 30% without triggering a takeover offer.

What usually happens:

Company needs cash.

Strategic investor agrees to fund it.

Shareholders vote to waive Rule 9 (mandatory bid rule).

Investor’s stake increases legally.

This is extremely common on AIM — especially with mining explorers that rely on a cornerstone backer.

While I won’t assume specific resolutions without the full circular text, the structure of the fundraises and subscription agreements strongly implies Rule 9 waivers were used — otherwise Purebond couldn’t have moved from minority → majority without a bid.

🟢 They didn’t “acquire control” in one transaction

Another subtlety:

Purebond built its stake gradually through new share issues.

That’s very different from buying a controlling block from existing holders.

Takeover rules focus heavily on control via acquisition, not ong

"Because I don’t want to pay you, and you divert the money to buy the next private jet and still return to say gas supply is low.’"

Surely not :)

There's been heavy buying pressure all week ie demand.

The shares were at full bid for large quantities and the ask for quantity was at a sizeable premium.

It's simply a case of supply and demand, which hasn't necessarily been published yet.

Thanks very much for the information. Your last post covers my question arising from your first post having looked at the site :)

Best of luck. We all need that.

Hi Ianbeej,

Where did you source the fact that Comex have allocated 88 million ounces of silver for delivery in March please.

I nearly bought some more yesterday morning.

Https://www.pkf.com/pkf-firms/africa/

Well spotted and that could explain the positive share price activity:

https://www.savannah-energy.com/investors/shareholder-information/investor-contacts/

https://www.pkf-l.com/

AK has nearly 293 million shares and he is listed on the Company's "Major Shareholders" page as owning them directly of through Lothian Capital Partners 2 Limited, which is 100% beneficially and legally owned by him.

A quick scan at Companies House shows a number of Lothian Capital Partners companies and LCP1 is a dormant company, whilst LCP6 was only formed in March 2025 and as such no accounts have been published.

Thus, on the face of it the transfer from LCP1 to AK and LCP6 to LCP2 appear to be to align AK's holdings with the Company's Major Shareholder's page.