Member Info for Professor1

agree with what's been said roxi and sebo. i believe the mindset is no outside company should benefit from controlling the asset - in one of the court judgements i posted here, they said they were willing to form a jv so i think the dispute must be along the line of who has control and mb won't give that away.

i also think the rajasthan government have total disregard for bit. however, i believe the indian govt won't let this go to the international tribunal and dent whatever good is being done by them in other areas. but, you never know.

mb has made the decision that enough is enough. for us, mb and the team from fascans has seen this as a winner for us and indeed mb has mentioned in one of the video interviews - it's a win win for us. better still , judging by the amount of $5.4 billion awarded against ****stan government based on discounted cash flows from the project on the case i posted recently, the discounted pv of the cash flows come to $1.5 billion. i would be happy to wait whatever it takes but imagine this would take 2 to 3 years as the fascan team seem well progressed already for over a year now but it's a question we can raise with mb.

my guess is a letter has already gone out to them from mb stating a case will be filed under the bit if the rajasthan government do not get to the table to reach an amicable agreement by a certain date.

Courtesy of a poster on another chat board. My word, this is powerful!!!

https://youtu.be/JB7FzsWXizk?si=3qBd9n_c9lreZ-tq

News soon?

Hi Mickey

Agree - mine is not great either. The news will catch on soon.

FOOD FOR THOUGHT - WE WERE AT 3.70p ON 6 APRIL 2023

" the tribunal decided that discounted cash-flow would be used for the valuation of investment's market value.........citing crystallex v venezuela"

" the tribunal noted that dcf valuation was taken into account by mining bodies....". " the tribunal set a compound interest rate according to international law authorities"

https://www.iisd.org/itn/en/2019/12/17/tribunal-finds-****stan-breached-fet-expropriation-non-impairment-obligations-mining-joint-venture-with-australian-investor-tethyan-copper-company-tethyan-copper-company-v-****stan-icsid-arb-12-1/

game on - as we have mentioned all along

Agree with all here:

The share price, on announcement of the funding, has not really caught up to where it should be - hoping this will change soon

Obviously the share price increase will happen over time and I am hoping will accelerate leading up to the announcement of the quantum of the claim - MB mentions in the interview that we are significantly advanced with our team of specialists advisors.

Currently, without any claim figure, we are obviously not seeing much increase. Ignoring for a moment the size of our asset and the profit which will be forgone if there is no amicable agreement, even if we were to use the same quantum of claim of £740 million or so made by GreenX on their coal assets, our share price has a lot of ground to cover.

GreenX, when it first talked about the claim amount back in September 2020, I believe their share price was around 10p. This has increased 4-5 folds today with the outcome not yet reached. I believe this increase in their share price works to around only 20% of the claim amount. If we were to apply 20% to an equivalent amount of claim of £740 million when announced, we would expect the share price to reflect, over time, an increase in market cap, on an equivalent basis, £148 million OR £148m/154m shares = 96p. Currently, we are at 9p which is 1/10 of what we could achieve on similar basis as GreenX (assume for now over the same period as GreenX) once the claim is announced. If we were to instead be awarded say the full claim equivalent to that submitted by GreenX then you can see where the share price could get to.

We don't know what claim figure MB has in mind. If GreenX have submitted their claim on the basis of the market value of the coal assets and the profit forgone and factoring the time value of money, my estimated workings based on a 25 year project producing 350,000 ounces of gold each year indicates that we could possibly submit a claim in the range of some £1.45 Billion based on 6.7 million ounces with gold market price of £1800 and costs of £800 and an initial outlay of £250 M + interest rate of 10%.

I can't for a moment imagine that the Indian Govt, who recently has been entering into bilateral treaties particularly with Australia on a range of areas covering mining, would allow their image to be tarnished.

I don't think that there will be an agreement soon - certainly not before the next court hearing - I am hoping for the next RNS to say that the parties have started discussions towards that goal.

Hi Mickey and all

Just caught your message - I was going to post but got extremely busy. I will post later tonight or tomorrow morning

Stampee1, I personally would be very happy with that.

Hi Mickey

I should have added that on the flip side, a mere £750 Million POSSIBLE compensation would, over the same time horizon and growing at a rate of 7% would be worth over £4 Billion to PAT and us shareholders

Hello everyone

Apologies only just got free so I thought of doing some quick analysis based on the following assumptions. If we have a corporate finance person amongst us then please could they check this. Alternatively, I know Mark reads our BB so I could check up with him:

(1) I have attempted to see (and I am by no account, unlike Mark, Corporate Finance expert) if the NPV would be beneficial if the Rajasthan Govt did not reach an amicable agreement with us but instead had to fork out a mere £750M (to be conservative) in arbitration and then undertake the project themselves. They would therefore need to borrow, on day one:

a) £750M to be payable to PAT and

b) £250M to undertake the project (I think this is reasonable cost to assume BUT I may be wrong so please correct me if necessary).

(2) Assume the project would take 25 years.

(3) Their initial outlay will therefore be not £250M but £1 BILLION as they need to take into account the compensation payable to PAT.

(4) Assume the first 5 years of the project will have negative cash flows as they need to borrow £1Billion. Assume the interest rate for the borrowing is 10% to reflect the inherent risk. Therefore, they will have negative -100Million cash outflow each year for the first 5 years and no positive cash inflow.

(5) Assume they start mining from year 6 and sell what they produce - assume they produce 350,000 ounces per year from year 6 to year 25. [That is 7 million ounces in total ]. Also assume they make £1000 profit per ounce (£1800 selling price less £800 costs). So they will make £350Million of cash flow each year from year 6 to year 20 inclusive. [This will produce positive cash flow of £7 Billion over the 20 year period. ] (i.e. 350,000 ounces x £1000 x 20 years).

(6) However, they need to service the loan interest each year at 10% on the £1Billion = £100Million.

(7) Therefore, from year 6 to year 25 inclusive, they will have NET cashflow positive of £250 Million (i.e. £350Million less interest costs of £100 Million).

(8) The above cashflows from year 1 to year 25, discounted at the rate of 10% will PRODUCE A NEGATIVE NPV OF -£57.5 MILLION FOR THE RAJASTHAN GOVT.

(9) Over the life of the project, although a net cashflow of £3.5 Billion (UNDISCOUNTED) is produced [i.e. -£(100 Million) for the first 5 years, followed by +£250 Million for the years 6 to 20 and finally repaying the borrowed sum of £-1 Billion at year 25 ], when these are discounted to present value at 10%, the project IS NOT WORTH FOR THEM TO UNDERTAKE DUE TO THE FRONT LOADED COST OF £1BILLION.

(10) If the above holds true, it will be in the best interests of the Rajasthan Govt to reach an amicable agreement with PAT.

Good Luck All

Deffo

Thank you for raising the issue

It's a no brainer here - simply accumulate and sit back for the news to come soon

This work continues to confirm our belief that the geology of the Erongo region, plays host to a burgeoning critical metals province in Namibia. As we increase and diversify production at Uis, we are also striving to discover and define additional tech-metals resources with the potential to develop into standalone operations."

Mark wants to develop the mine in conjunction with the JV partner - negotiations with the potential JV are at a very advanced stage.

The plan is to announce the JV partner at the same time any deal with the govt of Rajasthan is announced.

The last time I spoke with Mark, he was in Singapore and you can guess where!!!!.

Could not resist re-reading the RNS again = this is so so mega for PAT and things are going to change for good from hereon for PAT and all us.

We now have an upper hand as the Team is firm in their belief we will get market value award at the arbitration. This will be reflected in the coming days. The Rajasthan govt treated us like dirt for all these years having deliberately embezzled our world class asset.

This has now come back to haunt them forever for not playing fairly by the rules.

Hi Edhellas

No worries at all. All good points.

Welcome Shearclass and good post.

Scene already now set for the next stage. I still believe with the ultimate aim still of reaching some kind of agreement- EVEN IF IT'S PARTIAL IN MY VIEW (POTENTIAL JV) but without any govt stake in it.

I think MB must be very busy today doing interviews - so hopefully expect a video interview on Proactive later today!!!!!