Member Info for PaulFG

I think Mike's activity with:

> DFC

> SAFELOOP

> AFC

> Chinese JV partner - but with the legal entity based outside of China

Has afforded him the flexibility he'll require to navigate the world as we move forward.

Incredible to think of POG~ and where KEFI SP is - goes to show how much the market is simply not trusting HAA until those financing agreements are actually signed.

Https://youtu.be/eWIKo-jBx_Y?si=MfeoCmEvtOvUyY5l

Tungsten and GMET being mentioned again

Interestingly other US based tungsten companies also getting mentioned now too.

Yup I agree - market waiting for MRE/JORC at least.

The Australian can be pretty hands on about protecting critical metals/resources, I think if Boland turned out to be strategic, large, and easily/cheaply recoverable, they would block that type of activity.

Okay it's good to see all of stage 1 together:

First lot:

· CBAC0206 intersected 9m at 1,690 ppm Total Rare Earth Oxides ("TREO") (354 ppm Nd + Pr and 36 ppm Dy + Tb) from 38m, including 1m at 8,082 ppm TREO (1,698 ppm Nd + Pr and 179 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0194 intersected 13m at 1,735 ppm TREO (491 ppm Nd + Pr and 17 ppm Dy + Tb) from 38m, including 3m at 4,142 ppm TREO (656 ppm Nd + Pr and 45 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0197 intersected 4m at 2,116 ppm TREO (465 ppm Nd + Pr and 12 ppm Dy + Tb) from 50m, including 2m at 3,089 ppm TREO (1,294 ppm Nd + Pr and 45 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0191 intersected 7m at 1,572 ppm TREO (343 ppm Nd + Pr and 12 ppm Dy + Tb) from 53m

· CBAC0199 intersected 4m at 942 ppm TREO (192 ppm Nd + Pr and 22 ppm Dy + Tb) from 15m, including 2m at 1,350 ppm TREO (280 ppm Nd + Pr and 30 ppm Dy + Tb)

Announced today:

· CBAC0218 intersected 6m at 2,278 ppm TREO (621 ppm Nd + Pr and 39 ppm Dy + Tb) from 54m

CBAC0207 intersected 4m at 1,696 ppm Total Rare Earth Oxides ("TREO") (596 ppm Nd + Pr and 10 ppm Dy + Tb) from 59m

· CBAC0208 intersected 9m at 1,569 ppm TREO (452 ppm Nd + Pr and 20 ppm Dy + Tb) from 58m

· CBAC0209 intersected 5m at 1,582 ppm TREO (330 ppm Nd + Pr and 15 ppm Dy + Tb) from 58m

· CBAC0216 intersected 5m at 730 ppm TREO (141 ppm Nd + Pr and 22 ppm Dy + Tb) from 37m, including 1m at 1002 ppm TREO (202 ppm Nd + Pr and 9 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0219 intersected 9m at 1,968 ppm TREO (586 ppm Nd + Pr and 17 ppm Dy + Tb) from 57m

· CBAC0220 intersected 6m at 1,739 ppm TREO (480 ppm Nd + Pr and 15 ppm Dy + Tb) from 48m

· CBAC0225 intersected 3m at 1,375 ppm TREO (408 ppm Nd + Pr and 18 ppm Dy + Tb) from 57m

· CBAC0226 intersected 1m at 2,598 ppm TREO (735ppm Nd + Pr and 19 ppm Dy + Tb) from 54m

· CBAC0227 intersected 7m at 1,606 ppm TREO (146 ppm Nd + Pr and 9 ppm Dy + Tb) from 32m including 2m at 3,591 ppm TREO (139 ppm Nd + Pr and 6 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0239 intersected 6m at 520 ppm TREO (98 ppm Nd + Pr and 8 ppm Dy + Tb) from 32m including 1m at 1,127 ppm TREO (213 ppm Nd + Pr and 16 ppm Dy + Tb) and 6m at 1,071 ppm TREO (228 ppm Nd + Pr and 7 ppm Dy + Tb) from 42m including 3m at 1,610 ppm TREO (391 ppm Nd + Pr and 10 ppm Dy + Tb)

· CBAC0240 intersected 5m at 873 ppm TREO (205 ppm Nd + Pr and 15 ppm Dy + Tb) from 34m including 1m at 1,621 ppm TREO (369 ppm Nd + Pr and 10 ppm Dy + Tb)

I'm afraid you and the rest of the market - although this announcement seems more concrete but we've seen monthly this-time-next-month announcements for over a year that frankly no one is going to buy in on this, as positive as it sounds, until the darn thing is actually signed.

Listening to OF on The Sunday Roast just now talking about Tungsten future demand based on Fusion energy production. I do wonder if Tungsten production/identified resources will actually limit Fusion development? They acknowledge that there's probably not enough Tungsten on the planet to meet this demand.

So how far will Fusion research actually progress to production? Will it only progress in jurisdictions with their own Tungsten deposits? How aggressive will the US be in this space? It's very fossil fuel oriented under Trump.

It's an important discussion but I'm unsure how rapidly Government Bureaucracy can respond. It'll probably need Government conducting their own research, which'll obviously take another chunk of time.

But great people like OF are kicking off the discussion, I look forward to following the longterm progress in the space.

Conclusion:

At the end of the analysis, I remain LONG TERM bullish, although a little more tempered because of short-term factors. There are now other companies on US soil developing Tungsten deposits (I don’t know about grades etc) but certainly John Fenneck has mentioned one that is a minnow listed on the US Market (can’t remember the name, but at the time mcap was only $12m), Almonty industries (probably the largest global Tungsten producer beyond the sphere of influence of Russia/China) has recently domiciled in the USA.

I think I need to see something more than individual drill results (I know that’s where we are as a company) but I think the share price has reacted almost as much as it can on this basis. I want to see that PFS, its progress is never mentioned AS MUCH as I’d like to hear (again I accept that’s where we are as a company) but I wanna hear more about that and I think the market needs to too.

ON that basis I decided to test what the appetite there is in the market to buy stock (bearing in mind we’ve had some excellent news recently and generally everyone - everyone that’s probably already a shareholder – is very upbeat.). So for the first time I decided to sell some stock to test actual market appetite (not millions of shares) – I gotta tell ye it was pretty difficult to offload (& I wanted to do it quietly not as a distressed seller) no decent volume could be sold – certainly nothing over 50k and even at that level it was very difficult, had to drop to much lower volumes to get anything away. That practical exercise backed up my thoughts as laid out earlier.

Long term yes good probability of something good, short term I think the players that are in, are in, not to say there may not be more Strategic Private Placements but they don’t seem to move the market that much or for a long time.

I was listening to one of the many podcasts about GMET the other day, don't ask me which one. But someone made the technical point about higher lows being made which is bullish and it got me thinking about current price and why we seem to be stuck in albeit a reasonably tight range.

So putting on my both-sides-of -the -coin-hat:

1. Yes we're getting good drill results on a monthly basis - is there a bit of market ennui with this? I mean probably the people that react to individual drill results are already positioned (?) so it's not attracting new money.

2. Great to see UMAC increase their strategic holding at these levels (initially I was very bullish this) and yes these guys usually invest for serious multiple returns BUT they also take a 5-10yr time-horizon and probably will not be too perturbed if the SP doesn't to anything for quite a while, or even dips, because they're taking a long term view.

3. No matter what way we try to spin that sale from POW to UMAC, it was insider buying, but it can also be regarded as insider selling. In the past I have talked myself out of paying attention to that signal and almost always lost money as a result. I am not saying this is a bearish signal but it does signal to me that again we have to take the long term view and I don't care what the reasons for POW selling are, they wouldn't have sold had there been a reasonable probability of good short term gains in the SP. Overall Long term for me this remains a bullish signal but in the short term it may signal at best lacklustre and possibility a slight pullback.

4. Technically - not that I give much credence to technical indicators for small, relatively illiquid stocks, but looks like MACD have crossed to give a bearish signal, we seem to be, at least in a short term, in a trend of making lower lows (as opposed to those higher lows that started me thinking in the 1st instance). Again it's a factor but I don't think it's a huge one here, given trading volumes & this could reverse quickly.

5. Tungsten - this ain't gold/silver/lithium/graphite/copper where there's much more market awareness. Even OF has said in the recent trade shows he's attended the overriding question has been around ascertaining what is the Tungsten story? Leads me to think it'll be a while, if ever, before we see any meaningful general mkt piling in to this space.

6. Grants - I don't see anything landing before end of 2025 - that's also backed up by DoD slides posted on X by the myriad of rampers. In the end yes it's Trump, but there's still a bureaucracy in place (no matter how quickly Must seeks to reduce it) the Trump objective is to reduce fed gov -and this is likely to reduce activity. I am loath to try and quantity the 'Trump' factor because of unpredictability. He could as easily nationalise critical metal resources as provided monies to accelerate development/production - so let's take Trump out of the equation until we see what he actually does.

Conclusion ...

Funding/placements do not have to end the world - GMET has carried out many private placements with strategic investors in the last year and the price hasn't collapsed.

Personally, I think H2 will deliver some serious re-evaluation here that will encourage not just debt financing but strategic new private investors.

Maybe LW you should just return when everything aligns to your risk profile.

One thing that came up yesterday, that was new for me anyway (perhaps I'm not paying enough attention), was this idea of 3 DFS subsets of the one larger DFS. With that in mind perhaps Mike is thinking of delivering a phased approach and this may be tied to funding requirements ( I don't know).

I expect H2 this year will be when BRES starts to deliver serious value-adding headlines, which will perhaps encourage some of those other strategic investors, at project level, to commit funding. There was a lot of very interesting stuff Mike said yesterday in these interviews.

Yes a series of good interviews yesterday. I don't pay much attention to Production within 12 months stuff - he has to give some sort of deadline I guess, but I've never seen these been met.

For me the most important thing is he's working along a path to success. There's clearly a lot going on behind the scenes in order to generate these RNSs but even getting financial agreements signed with financial institutions can take forever, the fact that there's concrete interest, at this stage, from both DFC & AFC is great.

So I'm very happy with Mike's progress and his identified progression and that's about all I can take from it. Happy to remain a shareholder and even add to the holding when opportunities arise.

Just have to keep an eye on the geopolitical situation.

Yes I'm not going to get concerned about intra month share price fluctuations.

Testing has gone exceptionally well

Drilling is going well

Resource estimation expected this year

Lots of heavy insider buys.

Quite happy to take advantage of any buying opportunities before a resource is defined.

Agreed, very positive step (?), expression of interest at any rate. Good to see potential partners for debt financing, rare as hen's teeth for small developers these days. AFC, as has been said, is a major African Bank, with some excellent experience in the commodity space.

Okay I found this very technical article on the process and it seems it does indeed utilise Tungsten in the design

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920379625000705

Very positive feeling here about the possibility of energy being produced commercially by Nuclear Fusion within the next decade.

I can't find though if this method uses Tungsten or not.

Any thoughts?

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250226083304/en/Proxima-Fusion-and-Partners-Publish-First-of-a-Kind-Fusion-Power-Plant-Concept-to-Bring-Limitless-Safe-Clean-Energy-to-the-Grid

Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aHuuzoegas

I think, given all the education COBR have tried to impart over the last year, grade alone is not the determining factor here, hence all their previous testing BEFORE they went to define the resource.

But for what it's worth, here's a paper:http://sydney2018.aseg.org.au/Documents/Tuesday%20Abstracts/T4.3E.pdf

The results announced today, seem to be much better than those announced last May. Positive.

So these were the results they announced May 2024:

"· IR 123 intersected 10m at 1,501 ppm Total Rare Earth Oxide ("TREO"), where Nd2O3 + Pr6O11 (Nd+Pr) totals 206 ppm and Dy2O3 + Tb2O3 (Dy + Tb) totals 6 ppm from 20m

· IR 234 intersected 2m at 778 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 167 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 16 ppm from 26m and 4m at 1,407 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 302 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 13 ppm from 48m

· IR 235 intersected 2m at 515 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 95 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 7 ppm from 22m and 8m at 1,279 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 318 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 13 ppm from 56m

· IR 236 intersected 6m at 968 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 208 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 32 ppm from 2m

· IR 239 intersected 4m at 945 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 190 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 22 ppm from 20m

· IR 245 intersected 6m at 820 ppm TREO, where Nd + Pr totals 171 ppm and Dy + Tb totals 15 ppm from 10m"