Member Info for OrangeMoon

Seingred, my optimism isn't without justification... If you recall the investor presentation post-raise, it was stated that we were just looking to see if we had "the right rocks in the right places". General mineralisation could have been noted (which could have included everything but Au + Ag) which is all to common for exploration, as I'm sure you will be aware. Therefore, as long as we had proved the concept (rocks in the right places), this could be considered a success – and from that point onwards, we would be in a good position for any JV interest that may have been in the background. Again, at that point in time, the feeling was that there was great interest.

Fast forward to December 2025… We have not only hit "mineralisation" but we have hit silver mineralisation (as noted by the visible silver) + gold. Therefore, the ball is firmly in our court. I agree – our feet should be kept firmly on the ground with respect to grades, width, and depth etc… however, we are over the first hurdle, and IMO this has yet to be reflected in the market cap.

Our projects are not limited to Columbia either... Results from El Pantano (Argentina) should be in by end of week IMO.

If these results had been out in November 2025, then 20's would have been long gone, however, Silver prices were also 50% of today's, or there about.

The bigger picture and longer-term view for OMI should be the consideration of explorers and miners preferring a right-wing, mining-friendly government. Therefore, from a political point of view, we are heading in the right direction.

Regime change in the region is a positive for OMI.

This has been stated a few times in the investor presentations.

I'm not implying that gold (or silver) was the driving factor behind the situation in Venezuela; rather, it’s an added advantage when you consider ‘reserves’ and the declining strength of the USD. The real motive was oil — anyone denying that is being quite naive.

Similarly, to suggest that a failed operation wouldn’t have serious economic repercussions for Colombia is just as naive. The entire time the US military has been positioned around Venezuela, that potential has been real.

I’m more than willing to discuss the risks surrounding OMI here, as I’m confident in my investment. However, posters like Johnstone and others have lost the privilege of debate — they tend to show up with a plastic spoon to a gunfight. They’ll be staying in the green bin. I’d recommend others do the same if these posters unsettle your position here; it’s better for peace of mind.

The general consensus, particularly among Western governments like the United States, the European Union, and several Latin American countries (including former allies like Brazil and Colombia), is that Nicolás Maduro's hold on power in Venezuela was illegitimate following disputed presidential elections in 2018 and again in 2024, which were widely viewed as fraudulent and lacking transparency. These elections were criticized for irregularities, suppression of opposition candidates (such as the disqualification of María Corina Machado), and lack of independent oversight, leading to Maduro's regime being described as authoritarian and reliant on control of state institutions rather than democratic mandate. Within Venezuela, polls as recent as September 2025 showed about 63% of the population rejecting his legitimacy, amid ongoing economic collapse, corruption, and humanitarian crises that drove millions to emigrate. However, Maduro maintained support from allies like Russia, China, and Iran, and he framed his rule as a "victorious resistance" against external pressures in public addresses through late 2025.

If Maduro was legitimate, then his people and his 'generals' (for one word or another) would have put up a fight... as far as I can see, not even a punch thrown from his side.

In and our within a few hours... that shows how 'legitimate' he was. Influencers all over social media trying to grab a peace of the attention, left and right. All for clout.

Just be thankfully this has been a clean operation. No one wants another bloody war. Although this would be very profitable for those sitting behind screens screaming for their share of 'views'.

Grouchfungus - Yes, entirely possible. MM's playbook full of nasty games... Looking forward to some 'juicy' results from El Pantano. But again - This isn't usually how exploration works 💰... 'usually'.

Napth - Yes, this has been about resources all along. Oil/Gold/Silver... you name it. If it had been about narcotics, USA would have went straight to the source. Must of missed Narcos Venezuela... or maybe Netflix hasn't got round to amending it yet.

I wouldn't have thought so... this is a very positive development for OMI.

Investors who have been risk averse to this situation over the last 12-18 months should see this as a positive move.

Venezuela 'trumps' Columbias gold reseverves by a large margin (in ground and out). So let's hope the big orange one is satisfied.

If anything, this regime change in Venezuela weakens Gustavo Petros position, just in time for Columbia elections in May.

Cartel de la Luna approves.

Regardless of your political stance, this operation was carried out quickly and with minimal mess—a testament to the exceptional planning and precision of the U.S. military.

A full-scale war would not have been good for OMI holders and has been a significant risk factor to consider.

Let’s hope this swift 'in-and-out operation' marks the end of it.

A link the the most recent OMI Investor Presentation December 2025 for any new comers.

https://youtu.be/ByLWLLXcSBU?si=412a_L5auELpE24U

A very promising 2026 inbound...

Following completion of the 1,451.1m diamond drilling ("DD") programme at Yarrol in early Q4 2025, assay results are expected in batches between now and the end of January 2026.

Not long now.

The stage has been set for El Pantano.

Indications of 'visible' Ag/Au Mineralisation - Rocketing past the 'potential mineralised rock structures' that we were aiming for.

Gold Price resumed it's bull run into the close of the year (as expected by those on the right path) - plus now we must consider the exploding Silver Price.

A quick thanks to those informative posters on this board this year (albeit I joined later in the year), whether that be those who are a little rampy or those trying to temper expectations... and of course a big thanks to Loius and Brad and all OMI team for their efforts.

Merry X-Mass when it comes OMI holders. Hope you can all enjoy the festivities and spend some time with your loved ones.

JohnBrigggs, you couldn't be further from the truth with regards to OMI and Brad.

Your benched remarks hold no water here and your trolling history proves what side of the fence you stand on.

One more for the filter 'green box'.

Just watched the new presentation several times over... Wow... Very Bullish.

They said in the previous interview that they may have majors sniffing around / interested in what they have at El Pantano, they just needed to prove concept first.

Well... We're just at the start of this programme and we have smashed the conceptual doors open via visuals... looking forward to what the next detailed RNS reveals including any grades.

Looks like OMI's hand(s) are getting 'stronger by the drill bit' for any potential negotiations, should we choose to take that route.

I'll wait until the full picture is developed here before making a decision.

MILA have had a single hole assayd... One.

The scenario whereby the 2nd/3rd/4th holes are better than the first is in play IMO... if no delays, MILA would have had 8 cores to pick and choose results from.

Seingred, good comparison - very similar to OMI albeit at a later stage... underscoring a realistic Mcap for OMI at least 2-3 times current Mcap going into production. Will be more than happy waiting 2-3 years to essentially double or treble my investment (PEPAS Only).

Regarding funding, yes, raising capital is par for the course for any junior miner moving toward production. That said, even in the highly unlikely scenario where our other exploration projects yield no discoveries (which would provide greater bargaining power), we would still require only minimal additional capex to advance PEPAS. Not taking into account the price of gold - which again could be 50% - 100%+ by 2027/2028.

Nothing is ever certain in the exploration business, but I’m very optimistic with OMI – supported by Brad’s proven track record of consistently creating value for shareholders and evident by OMI's share price year to date.

I have to agree with you Dr. Remington. My largest holding is OMI, however I do hold a small amount of 'punt money' in various other gold juniors and some within the O/G sector. Most of these gold plays I entered months ago on mainly a TA basis and have done rather well on that basis alone (not all winners), however all said and done - nothing compares fundamentally to OMI.

If anything, these other small cap junior explorer's keep up a bit of entertainment on the quiet days with their high risk / high reward potential but can also provide good insight into industry sector comparisons.

Medjed,

Around 200m warrants at 2p and 200m warrants at 4p or there about (mostly legacy warrants unexpired).

If all warrants exercised, (theoretically) this would bring in around £13m cash.

If a big discovery is made, these warrants can help to limit any future cash raises.

PR, Yes well reiterated, and I agree with your post - There are no garentee's with exploration companies, high risk, high reward. Good to keep our feet firmly on the ground and futher our decisions as each RNS unfold more information. And on that note - there are scenarios whereby the first round of assays are not as good as the second round... but hopefully it all falls into place.

Overall, this phase of drilling is where there is alot of risk, but it's also where the biggest returns can be made should MILA make a 'discovery'.

Although this isn't a typical rampy post that most want to read (regarding risk), it's a balanced view that will hopefully help investors make more informed decisions.

AIMO DYOR

Note to self: Do not use the (Less than) symbol.. LSE does not approve.

A basic way to value a gold exploration company is by using industry benchmark pricing.

There are multiple other factors to consider however I'm personally using $100/oz in ground for MILA (due to being 'near surface' and in 'good jurisdiction', 'near-by infrastructure', 'high grades' and also 'low cash burn',).

Previously Yarrol had a non-JORC compliant resource (less than 100K resource) And historic drilling only proved mineralisation down to roughly 80m-100m.

So very basic analysis would say now that MILA have discovered mineralisation down to roughly 300M, this resource is likely to be 3X previous... so 300Koz. = 30M Mcap...

What we don't know - but what assays will provide more info for -is how big the resource will expand, shape and at what grade.

High grade, open pit being our most desirable resource for lower capex requirements when it comes to production (most economical).

Current Mcap is roughly 17M - therefore we are currently speculating that MILA has 'at least a 170Koz high grade resource'...

This is what mining exploration is all about, it's high risk, high reward... and no one really knows what's in ground until it's been proven up realistically through a JORC... but absolutely, MILA could do a 100% on results... 100% from todays Mcap being £34M (Not counting for foreign exchange rates)... MILA would need to hit a substantial meter/grade within the Diamond Drill Cores - and we might not yet be hitting the optimum location for the most dense part of any ore-body. Then again, we might exceed this too...