Member Info for PaulFG

... and as he said they only ask for further analysis on metals they're interested in, so they know which metals have the overlimits. I think he said they had had that overlimits analysis back on the that particular batch of assays too.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq9XqET_esM

Enticing comments around 'overlimits'.

Charles Archer suggests that POW may be considering disposing of some of its stake in GMET:

"The general idea is that Power will spend $3 million to earn a 49% stake in the Qatan exploration licence in southern Saudi Arabia - remember as I have said many times before, Saudi simply lacks the technical exploration expertise, but it has masses of capital to deploy. As Power does not have $3 million, and is unlikely to place shares anytime soon given the terms of the ACAM JV, one assumes that Sean's activity in the Middle East is bearing financial fruit, or else a portion of GMET shares may soon be sold off-market."

https://miningaim.co.uk/charles-archer-blog/f/artemis-guardian-power-ecr-your-tuesday-digest

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing if it happens, as long as the buyer is a long term investor and POW don't offload into the market churn.

@fulmar I agree there is most likely a good reason - I'm talking about transparency to the owners of the business.

I really don't want to start raising red flags on what has otherwise been an exemplary way to run an AIM company.

Unless there is some specific confidential reason as to why no further explanation was given about these options, that paragraph simply does not satisfy me as a shareholder in this company.

I mean okay, if they were granted to the consultant that is furthering our case with the US grant, as say a milestone reward for having secured the funding, I could understand as it would be tantamount to alerting the market prior to RNS re the grant - in which case wait until that RNS is due for release and then grant the options simultaneously.

I'm not saying I don't trust OFs judgement, but as shareholders we are deserving of more clarity if our holdings are to suffer further dilution.

Otherwise, yes nice RNS, though I have to confess I'm kinda over geophysics/geomagnetic studies now, really all I want to see is the hardcore evidence from the drill results.

"1,000,000 options over Ordinary Shares to two third-party consultants (500,000 each). The options are exercisable at 40p each. Half of the options vest immediately and the other half in twelve months' time."

To whom and why?

People like to dismiss the Demir involvement now, saying they've little or no experience in Gold. However, Prof C made it VERY CLEAR during the time Demir was involved was that CGNR were running the show, dictating where to drill etc etc - still nothing major uncovered.

Re PJ - like anyone, makes comments based on the latest information - he's been in the market for years running many PLCs so he pretty much has a good intuition on this stuff. What I heard was that his gut feeling was more pessimistic.

But ehy good luck to you if you heard something different - trade on that if you want. That's what makes a market.

Interesting what people heard PJ say yesterday.

I didn't hear him being very hopeful about CGNR pulling that rabbit out of hat, IF they did then...but it didn't sound like he was hopeful about that IF at all.

So I guess the positive is that with the lack of activity the rate of cash depletion is rapidly decreased.

Drilling now in October, let's see if its actually the case (how many times has it been delayed now?), but that also means, given December holiday season, that it could even be early Q2 2025 before officially reliable lab assay results.

Might see some warrant exercise RNSs coming soon.

I think that tree-shake started yesterday - clearly someone didn't like this.

Don't know anything about the JV partner but good to read they'll be targeting non-Chinese OEMs, that's significant and could enable more funding from DFC for the plant construction.

In fairness the mathematics was certainly helped by the link mutleyinferno posted yesterday - would love that GEO to review the last RNS

For a moment I was euphoric...then I realised they were rock chip samples...so now I'm merely very happy.

If nothing else it's a great headline to start the day with...

Roll-on diamond drill results...

Thanks Mutley, great video.

You'd like to think that this may also represent the last couple of boxes to be ticked-off for that mysterious SI to finally finalise the administration to invest...

...but nice to it confirmed in an RNS.

Roll on those (non-binding) offtake agreements.

Have to say, I was actually considering to buy back in until I read the recent RNS. Felt like, chasing dragons.

I would like to think we'd see a rise in anticipation...I think though that previously dashed hopes will temper any rise prior to a hard announcement.

Apple juice typically has a pH level of 3.5–4.0, which makes it less acidic than cider. The pH of fruit juices can range from 2.25–4.69, with a mean of 3.48. A lower pH indicates greater acidity

First 3 lines says it all:

· Exceptionally high recoveries of high value rare earths of up to 82%

· High recoveries achieved with low levels of impurities (deleterious elements) and low levels of acid consumption

· Positive progress supports low impact, low cost In Situ Recovery ("ISR") mining