Member Info for Qnard

I don't post elsewhere Magic, but I would like to know if you can you pick apart my post in an meaningful way?

BTW, I agree with your scepticism, Harry has a knack of doing just one more thing, however, I say a few years ago that he'll pull a few rabbits out of his hat and he's doing so. I agree with RobMj that placings are over - with the only caveat that another large rabbit may well justify one and to which I would not be opposed to

Orb - The £23 m isn’t a 'cash drop' into the company right now. It’s structured as Equity Risk Notes, the money is tied to the TK project and is only repaid in cash or converted into shares once the mine is up and running. Harry isn't a master liar, you need to understand what is happening. Based on current timelines, this funding would most likely only start to flow from first production. Happy to be corrected...

There’s been a lot of debate lately about whether Bonkers is a deramper or simply someone giving a more sceptical view. After reading a good range of his posts and the reactions to them, it’s pretty clear the situation isn’t as black-and-white as either side tends to present.

To be clear, I’m neither pro-Bonkers nor pro-ramping. What I am interested in is balance. When people only surround themselves with views that match their own, it becomes an echo chamber, and objectivity disappears quickly. I’ve learned that lesson the hard way myself—many years ago, taking an unbalanced view on a different investment cost me a six-figure sum. It was a sobering reminder that shutting out valid but uncomfortable points of view rarely ends well.

On the specifics here: Bonkers isn’t entirely negative on KEFI. He’s acknowledged the positives around TK, the financing progress, and the longer-term potential. His main criticisms—Saudi structure, dilution risk, licence position, and the need to prove additional ounces—are all real topics worth discussing, whether or not you agree with his conclusions.

Where things tend to flare up is Bonkers tone. His posts can be sharp, sarcastic, and at times personal, which makes his arguments feel more hostile than they need to be. That can drown out any of the substance and naturally makes some posters view him as a deramper. But on the flip side, there is also a lot of overly bullish posting here, with timelines and price targets that go well beyond anything the company itself has stated. Challenging that isn’t deramping; it’s just maintaining perspective.

So the bottom line is this: balanced debate is healthy. KEFI may will deliver and in bucket loads (my personal view and not investment advice!), but that doesn’t mean questions and concerns should be shut down. Equally, scepticism is welcome, but the way it’s delivered matters. If we can keep the focus on facts rather than personalities, the conversation will be far more useful for everyone.

Right, breakfast is over, too cold to jet ski at this time in the morning, too early for wine so I will cart myself off to the Medina which looks stunning.

Gla, Harry will deliver, patience is the key....

I have always wondered if, as he gets on so well with them, he'll buy it back, especially if indications are we'll have sufficient funds to be able to do it?

Hi Bonks, thanks! Now on my 4th glass so hopefully this is coherent. I would challenge you on what KEFI 'has' in Saudi in that it's not a pile of gold ounces. KEFI owns a stake in GMCO, an operating company with multiple deposits, multi-metal resources, and future production pathways.So yes, if you strip out all other metals, ignore gold equivalents, ignore the JV structure the project framework, you can produce a 250k oz gold figure

Your “KEFI share ~250k oz” is a rough home-made derivation, not an official figure and not directly comparable with the 3.1m AuEq headline.

7. Fact-check summary of each key statement

I’ll label each as: ✅ broadly correct, ⚠ partly right / outdated, ❌ off.

1. “Tula Kapi has 1.05m oz mineable from 1.7m oz resource” → ✅ Correct (reserve vs resource as per KEFI).

2. “Hawiah has 745,000oz resource (not mineable)” → ✅ Correct for gold resource; no reserve yet.

3. “Jibal Qutman has 902,000oz resource, not reserve” → ✅ Correct per 2025 MRE.

4. “1.7 + 902k + 745k ≈ 3.3m oz” → ✅ Arithmetic correct, gives ~3.35m oz of gold resources across TK + Hawiah + JQ.

5. “I don’t know why 3.1m has been used” → The answer: it’s GMCO’s Saudi 3.1m gold-equivalent ounces from the Aug 2024 Saudi update, not your 3-project sum and not pure gold.

6. “That leaves a resource of 1.65m oz from Saudi” → ⚠ This is your own back-calculation, not an official KEFI total. It happens to match 745k + 902k, but KEFI talks in AuEq for Saudi headlines.

7. “ARTAR owned 85%… Kefi’s share ~250koz” →

Ownership: ✅ broadly right now (KEFI 15%, others 85%).

250koz figure: ⚠ a rough home-brew estimate, not directly comparable with KEFI’s 3.1m AuEq or 3.8m AuEq JV numbers.

8. Why 12 people might have recommended that 3.1m post

Most likely because:

The number is from a real KEFI RNS (“3.1m gold-ounce equivalent” for Saudi JV resources).

On a bulletin board, people often gloss over:

Au vs AuEq

Gross JV vs KEFI attributable

Out-of-date vs current RNS

So they aren’t right in the sense you’re using the term (pure gold ounces attributable to KEFI), but they are quoting a real headline number and the crowd is just nodding it through.

9. Bottom line

Your understanding of the project-level resource and reserve numbers is solid.

Your instinct that 3.1m “doesn’t line up” with 1.7 + 0.745 + 0.902 is correct, because:

3.1m is a Saudi-only, gold-equivalent, JV-level number from Aug 2024; and

Your 3.35m is a mixed Ethiopia + Saudi, pure gold resource total.

The main “errors” in your post are:

Treating the board’s “3.1m oz” as if it should reconcile to your gold-only resource sum, and

Using your reconstructed 1.65m Saudi gold resource and applying 15% to call KEFI’s share “~250koz” as if that is directly comparable with a KEFI RNS headline. It isn’t wrong as a back-of-envelope number, but it’s not what KEFI themselves are quoting.

That already tells us the “3.1m” being quoted on the board is not “pure gold ounces at the three projects” in the way you’re interpreting it.

5. Where the “3.1m oz” actually comes from

KEFI’s Saudi Arabia Operational Update of 6 August 2024 states (my emphasis):

> “… to establish the current Mineral Resources of approximately 3.1 million gold-ounce equivalent …”

Key points:

1. The 3.1m figure is:

Saudi only (GMCO’s portfolio: Hawiah + Al Godeyer + Jibal Qutman and regional licences).

Expressed in gold-equivalent ounces, not pure gold ounces.

At the GMCO JV level, not KEFI attributable.

2. That 3.1m AuEq number is now out of date. A March 2025 update around Al Hajar North notes Hawiah + Jibal Qutman resources represent a combined 3.8 million gold-equivalent ounces.

So the board poster who wrote “3.1m oz” is almost certainly lifting the number from that 2024 Saudi RNS and either:

Dropped the word “gold-equivalent”, and/or

Didn’t state clearly it was Saudi JV resources only, not including TK, and

Didn’t distinguish GMCO total vs KEFI share.

Your intuition that the number must be some roll-up is right, but it’s a gold-equivalent JV metric, not a clean “ounces of gold KEFI owns.”

6. KEFI vs GMCO vs ARTAR – who owns what?

Ethiopia: Tulu Kapi

TKGM (Tulu Kapi operating company) is 95% beneficially owned by KEFI. Ethiopia holds a 5% free-carried interest.

Here, using the full 1.05 Moz ore reserve as “KEFI’s mineable gold” is basically fair (ignoring financing structures, streaming, etc.).

Saudi: GMCO (Hawiah, Jibal Qutman, etc.)

Historically, KEFI’s interest went:

34% in early days (G&M).

Reframed to 25% around early 2024.

Strategic review then agreed further dilution:

KEFI to accept dilution to 15% of GMCO by not contributing US$10m.

By the 2025 interim results, KEFI confirms it currently has a 15% interest in GMCO.

So today:

Hawiah & Jibal Qutman sit in GMCO, where KEFI has 15%, ARTAR & others effectively 85%.

Your line:

> “last time I checked ARTAR owned 85% of that resource”

As of 2025, that is broadly correct: KEFI 15%, majority partner ~85%.

Where your numbers drift is the attributable ounces:

> “Meaning kefis share is only a little under 250koz from the total resource , NOT RESERVE.”

If you are applying “KEFI share of Saudi gold resources” to a 1.65m oz figure (half of your 3.3m?) at 15%, that gives ~250koz. But:

The company’s headline Saudi numbers (3.1m, then 3.8m) are gold-equivalent, not pure gold.

The actual gold resources you quoted (745k + 902k) total ~1.65m oz, yes, but that excludes copper and silver that drive the AuEq figure.

KEFI’s share of Saudi resources is now 15% of GMCO’s resources, not 25%, and not based on a 1.65m official total (that number is your own reconstruction, not an RNS headline).

So:

Your project-level ounces (745k & 902k) are correct.

Your “KEFI share ~250k oz” is a rough home-made derivation, no

You’re not bonkers. You’re mostly right on the underlying numbers, but a couple of important nuances (gold vs gold-equivalent, JV vs KEFI share, and timing) are getting scrambled. That’s where the “3.1m oz” comes from and why it looks wrong.

I’ll go point by point.

1. Tulu Kapi (TK) – Ethiopia

What KEFI actually states

From KEFI’s own project info and recent results:

Probable ore reserve (i.e., economically mineable open-pit): 1.05 million ounces of gold.

Total mineral resources (open-pit & underground, all categories): about 1.7–1.72 million ounces of gold.

KEFI’s beneficial interest in TK is currently 95%.

Compared with the forum post

> “kefi have 1.05m oz of gold from Tula kapi thats mineable, and pretty decent grade too from a resource of 1.7m oz”

That is essentially correct:

1.05 Moz = Probable Ore Reserve (mineable).

1.7 Moz ≈ total Mineral Resource.

> “add 200k oz if you want to include the underground”

KEFI has talked historically about underground and satellite potential beyond the 1.05 Moz reserve, but that extra ~200koz is not a defined ore reserve in current disclosures. It’s more “exploration/expansion upside” than bankable mineable ounces.

So: treating 1.05 Moz as mineable and 1.7 Moz as resource is fine. Treating an extra 200 koz as “real” mineable ounces is speculative, not wrong per se, but not reported as such.

2. Hawiah Copper-Gold Project – Saudi Arabia

What KEFI actually states

The most recent Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) for Hawiah (including Al Godeyer) gives roughly:

Total tonnage: 36.2 Mt.

Metal content: about 297,000 t copper, 310,000 t zinc, 745,000 oz gold, and 11.6 Moz silver.

KEFI also expresses Hawiah (plus Al Godeyer) in gold-equivalent terms:

About 30 Mt at 2.5 g/t gold-equivalent, i.e. roughly 2.5 million gold-equivalent ounces.

Compared with the forum post

> “Hawiah has i believe 745,000oz resource (not mineable) and is a pretty big silver play”

The 745,000 oz gold figure is correct for Hawiah’s current MRE gold content.

It is indeed resource, not reserve. No ore reserve published yet.

“Pretty big silver play” is fair: 11.6 Moz silver is material.

3. Jibal Qutman – Saudi Arabia

What KEFI actually states

The updated Jibal Qutman MRE (Feb 2025):

37.0 Mt at 0.76 g/t Au, containing 902,000 ounces of gold.

83% of this is in the Indicated category, intended to support ore reserve work.

Compared with the forum post

> “Jibal qutman has a resource of 902,000 gold , again resource not reserve”

That is accurate and nicely up-to-date.

4. Your arithmetic: 3 projects added up

You (correctly) did:

Tulu Kapi resource: 1.7 Moz

Hawiah gold (not AuEq): 0.745 Moz

Jibal Qutman resource: 0.902 Moz

Let’s add them:

1.7 + 0.745 + 0.902 = 3.347 Moz ≈ 3.35 Moz

So yes, the straight sum of reported gold resources across TK + Hawiah + JQ is around 3.35 million ounces of gold, not 3.1m.

That already tells us the “3.1m” bein

I am sitting by the pool enjoying a lovely 23° and decided to check in on my fellow Kefalonians. I see the Bonkers bashing is continuing. Now Bonks and I go back, and we've had our disagreements, but whilst that may be the case, I do agree with some of the things he/she/they (insert options here) say. I am a couple of glasses into a rather nice red (I know, suns not over the yardarm, but wtf, I am on a well deserved holiday), and can't be bothered to do the analysis myself (it's the day job folks and I need a break), so I popped Bonks post into Chatgpt and asked the following: here is a post on a chat forum:xxx, please do as much research as possible and fact check each point. Take as long as is needed to do the research. Right, having lit the blue touch paper, I can't wait to see how this blows up...

I am having fun sharezy. Currently sitting next to the pool in Morocco in a delightful 23° (sorry folks, seen the forecast at home).

Right, off to do some sightseeing, I'll pop back in later on.

Have a fantastic day all!

Q

I asked for your views Pierre, not AI, if you have serious concerns you must be able to structure a reasoned counter argument?

I don't knock your view that this is uninvestable, what I am trying to uncover are your thoughts, and, if there is anything there that I have not spotted myself, I will re-evaluate my holding 😀

No. I took the time to provide a reasoned and balanced response to your post. What I am asking for is your detailed explanation as to why this is uninvestable. You must have reasons. I like to ask as, if I have genuinely missed something, then I need to re-evaluate my holding.

You could give a full and reasoned response. I am always willing to listen.

I don’t think anyone here is ignoring the history. The delays and security issues around Tulu Kapi and western Oromia are real, and they’ve been painful for shareholders. Early plans around 2015–2017 were repeatedly pushed back because of a mix of national politics, regional security, regulatory changes and the time it took to agree resettlement and security arrangements on the ground.

Where I disagree with “totally un-investable” is that the situation in 2025 is not the same as it was five or ten years ago.

Full project financing is now in place. KEFI has signed a US$240m project debt package for Tulu Kapi with development finance institutions and African banks, and the project syndicate has agreed a total development budget of about US$340m with equity commitments covering the balance. Full project development is scheduled to commence by year-end 2025.

It's not a paper project anymore. Tulu Kapi is fully permitted, early works (roads, camps, water, security) are progressing, and community resettlement and compensation programs have been designed and started in coordination with regional government.

The Ethiopian government has nailed its colours to the mast and Tulu Kapi is being positioned as one of the first modern industrial-scale gold mines in Ethiopia and is a flagship for opening up the mining sector. We now have a dedicated security presence reporting up to the federal level, precisely because of past incidents.

Security risk is being priced and underwritten by people who are on the ground. Development banks, regional African investors and Ethiopian government entities have all done their own risk work and are still willing to sign multi-hundred-million-dollar cheques. Are you saying that you know better than the banks who have committed so much money? You might still judge the risk too high, but it’s hard to say nobody with proper access to information finds it uninvestable.

In Oromia: yes, the wider region remains volatile and there are credible human-rights and security concerns. That is the backdrop for any investment here and it shouldn’t be sugar-coated. But there’s a difference between saying “this is a high-risk jurisdiction” and saying “there is zero way to mitigate or price that risk.” The whole structure of the project financing, the security arrangements and the government’s involvement are exactly about trying to manage that risk to an acceptable level for certain types of capital.

It’s also worth remembering KEFI is now a two-country story. In Saudi Arabia, Jibal Qutman has just had a material resource upgrade to ~902koz and Stage 1 development is being lined up with relatively modest KEFI equity input, and Hawiah continues to advance. Those assets are in a completely different jurisdictional risk bucket and are starting to matter in the valuation.

I don't understand why an individual with no history here and has clearly not done thorough research, claims it is uninvestable? Perhaps

Hi Bonks, thanks mate, appreciated. Hope you made a decent return as well. I am sorry you get bashed so much, your views go against the grain with some. Whilst you are far more conservative than others in your predictions, on my view that just makes you a more cautious investor, the fact that you have sold means you have actually banked a profit.

I tend to post infrequently and just correct those who are clearly inaccurate, I got lambasted years ago so changed my profile name and kept to myself.

My advice to anyone is read what the rampers and derampers say and treat it with a pinch of salt. Look at any significant points they raise and validate. Read those who thoughtfully post and again, check the facts and use them as part of the decision process when investing. I use the boards to unearth some interesting and valuable nuggets that I may have missed or make me wiser on a subject.

In the early days I bet my shirt on a business who were going to do amazing things and got caught up in the incessant ramping and ignored the detractors. That, my friends, was an important lesson, not just to me, but to any of you who choose to invest and are relatively new to the game.

Kefi is the only share I hold at present where I would say it is a definite investment, with possible hiccups along the way, that should be bought and tucked away for the future. This, BTW, is not investment advice, it is just my own personal view.

Do your research, never get tangled up in FOMO, there will always be another.

Wishing you all great returns on this share if/when you choose to invest

I should be more careful with my words, I have 'made' the amount on paper. My plan is to keep this 'paper' for a considerable amount of time based on the significant amount of research I have completed on this company over the years. I don't need any assistance from others trying to cast doubt on the company.

Fandango, my 'predicament' made me close to a third of a million pounds in a very short time, I have been here for a long time, averaged down heavily, and like I have said before, am quite prepared to meet up at a pub in Central London and prove what I say

I wonder who has reincarnated into our new French friend lol welcome back! I'll enjoy the laugh

Cast your eyes over the experience here:

BCM Group – appointed in April 2025 as Preferred Mining Contractor, to provide full mining services and will even contribute about US$23m of “equity-risk” capital toward pre-production civil and mining works. Then for processing plant design & construction you have Lycopodium Limited / Lycopodium Minerals.