Member Info for Shedulike

Thanks both, hopefully some clarity soon on PII. As for PI I did wonder with WR-B01Za not reaching TD and reported problems drilling the horizontal section yet still being a successful producer that they must believe that if op's go more to plan at KRT we could potentially be looking at even better results. Looks like last weeks reassuring words have taken us as far as they can, need some action on the ground.

In the Final Results (11th May) PH said this "Following these results, the drilling team upgraded the Company's service rig to enable it to be better utilised across a multi-well drilling programme, where four candidates have been risked, ranked, and prioritised. Following this initiative, Project II can advance in parallel to planned drilling under Project I". So if the rig is ready and the targets selected why aren't they cracking on with PII? Am I missing something obvious, is there some sort of synergy in conducting them strictly in parallel?

No as usual I thoroughly countered your points about EUZ but as always you take it personally. It's not exactly difficult to take your credibility down when you create multiple identities, pose as a potential investor who I seem to remember concluded that EUZ couldn't be taken seriously as an investment, and then subsequently announce they have bought in despite this ??? Previously we had years of near constant negativity punctuated by announcements of top ups, "Too far down to bother selling" and then you wait for 3p to sell - it never really made any sense did it? "Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive".

If you have already sold up how are you able to reaffirm Teaye's observation that it's NT to sell, surely you would need to hold some stock to test the market? Ooops!

No, there's still no certainty that 49% of the project with an upgraded PEA or 20% of the project with a PFS and enlarged mining area will be worth substantially more than £2.5m but on balance I personally think it will, I don't have an aspiration to be completely certain because I accept that I can't be, so we can chalk that allegation off for starters. It's still a risk reward calculation that everyone has to weigh up for themselves and their own circumstances. For years Bobby Beale was "Too far down to bother selling up", I'm sure we all remember that mantra, if this poster has sold up after all this time I'm guessing their sentiment has changed and I fully respect that. What I don't respect is the suggestion that holders are trying to lure in new investors in the hope of getting out with slightly reduced losses, I see no evidence of that and think it is a deplorable allegation.

Well if anyone is looking in with fresh eyes I wouldn't encourage them to invest or not despite the repugnant suggestions levelled at all holders in an earlier post. I would simply refer observers to the technical reports upon which they can make their own objective decisions. In 2020 Bara Consulting attributed a NPV of US$156m to the project. Since then we have increased the indicated resource substantially, completed the metallurgy, hydrology and geotechnical work. Denarius' new PEA will take all this into account and we will have a 49% share of a reworked NPV in their PEA. Of course no company has a divine right to own their share of an NPV figure, but by the time a PFS is completed the value in an attributed NPV becomes increasingly realistic. As we are positioned to execute leverage off the successful work undertaken to date it would seem to me that 20% of a JV ready to seek institutional banking investment will be worth way in excess of our current Mcap of £2.5m. Anyone wanting complete certainty in an investment needs to look at Government Gilts, so laughable to expect certainty in mining exploration. The stripped back judgement I am making is what 49% of the project is worth with the new PEA and what 20% is worth with a PFS and an enlarged mining area. Of course there is no certainty what this might be but the historical figures look robust to me as we incrementally de-risk the project, but don't take my word for it look at the technical reports and don't listen to bitter subjectivity would be my only advice.

Jed the upfront capex to point of mining was calculated as US$79m in 2021. That will obviously be higher now with inflationary pressure though the intervening successful ore sorting study means the processing plant will be smaller, whether that will completely offset inflation I don't know. The point is we need a robust FS in order to get an investment bank to finance the construction of a mine and that is why this confirmatory drilling is going on at the moment. Frustrating I agree but you can't put the cart in front of the horse.

Be careful what you wish for, if we stop drilling holes it will be because it's all over. Even when they're satisfied that we have enough certainty within the block model for the PFS, exploration will continue. Drilling holes kind of comes with being a mining exploration company. Hoping we might get assay results from 044 next week.

Evening Roger, Mm's and anyone else looking in - certainly the SP is dire but I think we're positioned reasonably well to finally lever off not just our own work but the historical exploration undertaken to date. I have never pretended that the Denarius deal fulfilled my top end expectations but it does provide a realistic path to actually mine this thing which we are guaranteed to have 20% of if Denarius meet their spending commitments. I'm much more interested in the enlarged mining area than 'new projects' so hope to hear more about that asap. I expect assay results to come thick and fast as we have two rigs going 24/7. As far as I can glean we will not be going beyond the block model during option 1 so it is all about proving that a Zn Pb-Ag mine is feasible for now and that is what will go into the PFS. I suspect following that, Denarius (backed by Aris Mining) will want to look beyond the BM and get an understanding how far the mineralised corridor goes east and of course what lies beneath and equally what this confusing copper story might amount to.

If you want a definitive record of trades check the proper London Stock Exchange website and also the Aquis Exchange, all UK executed trades should be listed in either of the two. The London South East platform that we post on only reports trade from the real LSE and makes an algorithmic judgement on what is a buy or sell depending on the real LSE spread quoted at the time. Note the London Stock Exchange website doesn't even report trades as buys or sells just the executed price as Mm's are obliged to report.

CJ & CH - that is also how I understand the copper. The traces we find are indicative of copper feeders (at least that was how it was described to me) below 1000m but the current drilling will stay within the block model. The strategy is to prove that a Zn, Pb/Ag mine is a feasible proposition but there could yet be a Cu bonus. Whether they plan to explore further east or deeper after the updated PEA but prior to the PFS I honestly don't know but I don't think we should anticipate it coming into the resource any time soon although interestingly the 2012 Micon report did quote a small indicated quantity of copper.

Bricks, I think a re-read of the 22nd March RNS would help answer your questions. Final works for the MLA are stated as, mining methods selected, site location for major facilities and plant defined , heritage, archeological environmental studies underway. Furthermore: "Finalisation of capital requirements and ongoing cost profiles is underway and will run in conjunction with formulation of a development schedule following the trade-off study completed with regard to potential mining methods. This work is ongoing and is on track to meet internal timelines for submission of the MLA by the Junta's deadline of 31 July 2023". The JORC off the back of current drilling will come later in the year and will contribute to the new PEA required for Option 1, the PFS of course must be delivered for Option 2. Looks like a plan to me.

CJ the agenda is quite simple and rather tragic - it's simply to unload their own misery on holders, surely even the distressed couldn't believe that their comments will move the price. In my experience every board seems to have one whether FTSE 100 or AIM. Of course it's worse on AIM where certain investors just don't seem mentally prepared for high risk investment. This ex investor has at long last crystallised their loss and is clearly finding some comfort in trying to post vexatiously. EUZ have a pathway forward and the risk / reward equation still looks good to me. Oh and a 'seasoned holder' has increased their stake, in fact an institutional investor... and at a premium to the SP. My last comment on this subject as I'm aware they won't go away or suddenly start posting objectively, seen it all before, sad.

I wouldn't factor in these commodity price predictions too much. The mining press report them as it's easy copy but for every one bit of analysis predicting something they'll soon be another along predicting the opposite. Zinc is an abundant element but it's also required for a heck of a lot of stuff so there should be support barring global meltdown and that wouldn't happen....... note to self, spring clean the Anderson shelter this weekend.

Jedster I wasn't referring to your post when I mentioned 'wishing ill'.

Teaye I'm hoping they'll be aiming some of these drills to the east soon, perhaps if they can prove the theory that the mineralised corridor extends east then we're get some leverage off what is proven to date within the block model. That could be a good inflexion point to look to average down.

Hi CJ, yes a most peculiar hobby - years of "I'm too far down to bother selling" then the 'bombshell' :) that they've finally sold when we actually have a pathway to own a share of a mine but still seemingly obsessed by the company. I guess if you lost so much money then trying to find comfort in wishing ill on remaining investors might explain it, but a worryingly unhealthy way to ease the pain.

Anyone looking in for the first time might find this helpful amid obvious attempts to obfuscate the situation. The asset is 100% owned by EUZ until Denarius fulfill their option 1 commitments at which time we will own 49%. To say that Toral is NOT 100% by EUZ at this time would not only only be misleading it would be plain wrong. Option 1 commitments include expenditures of US$4,000,000, delivering a new PEA and making a MLA by this coming July. It is obviously true that EUZ and Denarius intend to take the EUZ stake down to 49%, and after Option 2 down to 20% but this is the situation now. As in almost any exploration investment it is difficult to say what our stake will be worth in the future, so much depends on the continued operational success and ultimately whether a FS recommends that a mine should be built. We also wait what to find out what the enlarged mining area will offer the JV. Hope that helps, as ever it's all in the RNS's not silly analogies.

Good to see good confirmatory results from inside the block model from 043. Hole 044 is already completed with 045 & 046 ongoing. Wonder if these two are the long awaited forays to the east?

Evening Jedster - I think these are visitors rather than employees. I seem to remember we had about 5 University students who were specifically employed on the CDTI programme, as far as I can tell two of them have stayed on when that finished. I understand frustration all round, seems Myles isn't interested in keeping PI's updated through non-price sensitive updates that could be posted. The truth is we are currently in a 24/7 drilling operation that should interest the market but who would be interested in that if they can't see it? It's a shame that LR was definitely more tuned into this stuff, Myles is just completely indifferent to selling the potential.