Member Info for ShipwreckSheep

What makes you think so? Seems pretty orderly today, I guess enough offsetting buying in the end to accommodate the warrant-related flow from the past 2 days, but doesn't look like that much buying pressure so far today that would really force a move higher in mid.

Think in £ terms biggest print I've ever seen in Cobra, 76k quid, interesting, cause that doesn't seem like warrant flow if the trading time stamp is right at least then that was a buy

10-Sep-25 10:22:13 4.768 1,607,143 Unknown* 4.60 4.80 76.63k

Rough base case to show that the >80m$ profit per year that Meteoric have can be replicated without anything too flashy by Cobra as long as ISR is a go:

So yeah, just keep in mind that Meteoric is valued at 160m£+ and only has Caldeira as only project, with Brazil being the inferior mining jurisdiction compared to South Australia, meaning if below base case roughly holds, that alone is worth around 5 bags for Cobra (when you add the Barton-deal cash and shares & assuming small premium for the better jurisdiction and not being only a 1-project company). And that's at still pretty depressed rare earths spot prices, so margins could very easily double or more. And then from there...all of Manna Hill basically on top, whatever that value could be.

I invite all of you here along for the brainstorming and research, please do challenge my base case below if you think anything in it is a stretch, that's all on best guess basis based on the information we have gotten so far!

Assumptions:

6 Mt/y throughput (matching Meteoric's throughput)

1,200 ppm TREO (lower than Boland drilling results over the last years)

70% recovery (consistent with maiden MREC produced)

AISC $8/kg MREC (consistent with Feb 2025 presentation slides)

“MREC value” $25/kg with 80% payability (roughly consistent with Feb 2025 presentation slides & recent webinar)

Step-by-step

TREO contained (t/y)

6.0 Mt * 0.001 = 6,000 t TREO

TREO recovered (t/y)

6,000 * 0.70 = 4,200 t TREO

MREC produced (t/y and kg/y)

MREC t = 4,200 / 0.624 = 6,731 t

MREC kg = 6,730,769 kg

Realised price per kg MREC (net)

$25/kg (basket) * 0.80 payability = $20/kg MREC

Unit margin

$20 − $8 = $12/kg

Annual revenue, cost, margin

Revenue: 6,730,769 * $20 = $134.6m/y

AISC: 6,730,769 * $8 = $53.8m/y

Operating margin: $80.8m/y

The more I read about mining valuation, the clearer it is that scale beyond a threshold in REE is almost pointless. For EV (enterprise value) of a project, 20 year mine-life is what really drives that, anything beyond 20 years is heavily heavily discounted. Now if you look at some of the advanced clay REE projects (non-ISR though!) like Meteoric Resource's Caldeira, they have a 1.5 billion ton resource...which would be awesome if they could really utilise that. But guess what, their PFS (Slide 13, https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/MEI/02969122.pdf ) shows that "initial mine life" of 20 years and states optimised annual throughput of 6Mt, so 120Mt over those 20 years. The rest of their 1.5 Bt resource? Essentially useless in the sense that it doesn't really add to enterprise value.

So it's becoming more and more clear to me that some of these flashy "oh we have 100s and 100s of Mt resource" PR companies are really not of that much value, what matters is the quality! And the quality of Meteoric's Caldeira is alright I guess, look at the PFS numbers, they say on Slide 14 that their annual revenue is estimated as 86m$ EBITDA (profit). Those are numbers that Cobra can very realistically get to even in a base case scenario (as long as ISR is a green light!), because the all-in cost base is much lower with ISR.

Long story short: Look for those news mostly, the ISR viability, the MREC optimisation (reduce Cerium and Lanthanum) to push payability % higher from the 70% industry standard, and the recovery rates for TREO/MREO. Look less at scale, because 120 Mt and 1.5 Bt lead to pretty much the same project value given the very heavy value discounting of anything happening beyond 20 years.

I mean, it could actually be possible, that the margins shape up to be that high? Cause looking at Slide 16 of the Feb presentation for instance the HREO content of the MREC blows every other comparison out of the water, double the HREO from Meteoric for instance:

https://res.cloudinary.com/investorhub/raw/upload/v1740479854/leaf-prod/234/documents/Feb-25_Cobra_Resources_Presentation_FULL_xghtcz.pdf

And then ISR does its thing on the cost side, but holy smokes, those 8ish$ AISC per kg of MREC on Slide 19 paired with the comment from the webinar that they believe they can reduce/remove cerium and lanthanum and increase value of kg MREC over 30$ that way (& the super interesting post by RogB below on that) and also paired with Slide 18 saying that a ton of ore from Boland Zone 3 would yield 2.1kg of MREC...that got me salivating if that's true lol...with 5Mt throughput per year that'd be 10,200,000 kg of MREC per year at a margin of 20+$, now my maths degree is long in the past, but that is 200m$ EBITDA and EV/EBITDA multiples are usually 4x-10x in mining, so that's 800m$-2bn$ EV? That seems way way way too crazy to me, but...all of those numbers are in these slides and/or in the webinar!? So could that really be the upside scenario? What am I missing, help me out please? Maybe nothing given that David Clarke said in that Sunday Roast interview that has been brought up here that for him the Boland endgame is a valuation in the 100s of millions or even over a billion, god knows really, I'm trying to come up with something that to me sounds realistic, but given that I'm using the only numbers I can work with from company presentations, it makes me think "What if that is the realistic case and you're just a pessimistic sheep?"

I don't think I have enough time to create that anyway, still have a day job after all!

But spending the evening again trying to do some research, it's astonishing to me how long David Clarke seems to have worked on getting Manna Hill into the company portfolio (into Hamelin Gully Pty Ltd that is before he gave Cobra the option to it). It's been in the making at the very least since 2017, possibly longer, here's a document from Q3 2017 mentioning it, by Entree Resources, the previous company that focused on it before they got distracted by their Oyu Tolgai (one of the world's largest copper-gold projects) involvement:

"On May 23, 2017, the Blue Rose joint venture partners entered into an agreement with Hamelin Gully Pty Ltd, for the sale of data and information relating to ground surrendered by the Blue Rose joint venture partners and subsequently acquired by Hamelin Gully. The purchase price for the data and information was A$150,000. The transaction closed on July 11, 2017. "

( https://www.entreeresourcesltd.com/_resources/financials/Q3-2017-Entree-Resources-MDA-FINAL.pdf )

It's almost hard not to get distracted from focusing on the Boland prize even for me thinking that David was hunting down that Manna Hill project for 8 years and in the August RNS stated that it's the most exciting project that he got his hands on in over 50 years.

But have to say I find it hard to come up with better valuation estimates for Boland than what I did earlier with assumption for TREO grades, Mt mined per year, recovery %, payability %, and margin $/kg REO in the MREC, I know they're working on all of these factors right now, but looking at past RNS that state that Zone 3 of Boland is mapped across 130km2 and then the Feb 2025 presentation slides stating that Zone 3 yields 2.1kg MREC per ton of ore from Zone 3, and then I sit here and think "130km2 with 2100 TREO grade, do we even need those additional Yaninee high-grade zones?". I honestly think that almost every upcoming news story is more exciting than the maiden MRE, as with ISR viability even 50Mt will go a long multi-year way, but I'll still be very happy when we finally have it, because it will at least allow to plug "this is the absolute minimum value" numbers in. Will help to connect the dots, hopefully also on the margins, because with the AISC per kg/MREC from the Feb presentation slides, all-in cost looks like 7-8$/kg. Rupert mentioned 18$ current value per kg at spot prices, and > 30$/kg if they can remove cerium&lanthanum. But that would be over 20$/kg profit margin, that'd be higher than the Chinese ISR operation margins on Slide 8 of the newest webinar slides? Have to leave it for today, my head is spinning, probably I read something wrongly. I'd take it though!

Lol fully understand why you did, Trombone. Although you and I seem to be the only ones who consider that RNS the potentially most exciting one in the next months.

And that's even though so much news flow is due that we'll almost need our own info website to keep track of it all, like GGPHelp when GGP was the main growth story. Maybe I create CobraHelp if I'm bored...but then it'll just get spammed by snake bite victims probably

Honestly mate, I am convinced it's a good thing. Let's keep things straight, the warrants were set at strike prices of 2x the placement price in 2022, so the only reason they get executed is because the share has done well, so that's great.

They bring cash into the company accounts at a crucial time when 2 drill campaigns and at least 1 MRE (but quite possibly also a Blue Rose skarn MRE if the drill there hits a bit more copper) are due shortly, so that's great.

They do create a short-term dip from profit taking for warrant holders who don't want to keep their % in the company stable but rather want to keep their absolute share count stable, but it's at a time when new investors into the share want to build a position anyway because of the stellar fundamental prospects and upcoming news flow, so it gives them (and any LTHs who still want to build a bit more too) a better-than-expected entry, so that's great.

They will be out of the way when the key RNS hit, other than the 1000 remaining re-analysis samples, but even though imo that's an absolute key RNS (after following very closely what the company chooses to prioritise and how it moves strategically for the past 4 years), I doubt that many others see it as key RNS anyway, so when drill results and MRE and flowsheet optimisation and ISR test results and anything Blue Rose related hit, the value catalysts drive the SP without anything else holding it back anymore, so that's great.

But it's hard to time perfectly for anybody who wants to build a position, my guess is that now that somebody has started with warrants execution, the other warrant holders will likely follow suit quickly, but who knows...that means it's likely a better strategy to not buy total target position at once for anybody new wanting to build the position, but buy 20% of target position each week for the next 5 weeks while warrants could still be a dynamic. Well, unless the 1000+ samples RNS hits tomorrow and says "2 further high-grade zones of several 10s of km2 in Yaninee". It is imminent after all.

"Why do you think , we have so many Sells ?"

It's just the warrants, for the holders it depends, if they hold say 5 million shares in the company and want to hold 5 million shares after the warrants still, they have to sell the same amount in shares as they have warrants, and most of that will be sold before you actually get the execution RNS given that then they can cover the warrant execution costs with the sale proceeds.

It's around 43m warrants at 3p, around 5m are held by the 3 major shareholders who almost surely will not sell and maintain the same % of ownership that way after warrants are out of the way. So 38m warrants at 3p other than that, some of them will also just execute, without selling any shares, like bigmj said he will likely handle it, maybe a few won't execute for whatever reason, but I'd think it's probably 20-30m warrants that get executed by people who will sell shares to take profit on their warrants.

It's just short-term, but it's one of the very few phases where it's not great that this much is in sticky hands, limiting liquidity. On most days in COBR less than 1% of outstanding shares trade, and we've seen how quickly share price can move up due to that on any good fundamental news. But it means that 20-30m shares getting sold on the back of warrant execution can take a bit to clear.

It's a technical dynamic though, nothing changed about the project fundamentals, and the company will have > 1m£ additional cash from the warrant executions, so if anything just a case of "you'll get to add a few shares cheaper than you probably should be able to under normal circumstances due to a technical dynamic".

I think the insiders almost surely won't sell, andy. Not entirely sure about whether or not they can go past their 32% combined holding, but 1 of the 3 parties is David Clarke, right? So given the info in today's RNS, it's likely that he won't be able to exercise his warrants given probably has some information still that keeps him from being able to trade due to regulation, so very likely the deadline for his warrants gets extended same as for the options in the RNS.

The other insiders, well, they've been just as hardcore supportive over the years as David, all of them more and more increasing % they hold, to the extent also where they all had to get permission to go beyond the 30%, and never sold a single share. So I'd be very very surprised if they sell any shares now. If they really can't go past the 32%, they can simply exercise their warrants towards the end of the warrant period when most others have already executed and increased the total voting rights, given that they simply stay at their % then.

But I think they're only 5 million of the 43m warrants, looking at their participation in that Oct 2022 placing that gave 1 warrant for every 2 placement shares, so not too much.

Feels very very likely GGPThru, agree. And would think that given the first exercised warrant was shown that other warrant holders (the ones who want to take profit rather than hold the shares and keep their % in the company constant) also likely started to sell some of their holdings before exercising the warrant to cover their cost, so quite likely that the late reported prints we've seen the last days are warrant related. Not the easiest for market to deal with that warrant overhang short-term it seems, which I guess makes sense if a lot of warrant holders want to take profit instead of holding the shares, as 43m shares is a lot compared to average volume in COBR. The irony of something very positive for the company (improved financial position with the additional cash) causing a technical short-term difficulty to solve for the share price.

@Howard, I had posted the link here last week, yes. You'll need to copy it manually as LSE doesn't handle the commas in the link correctly

https://res.cloudinary.com/investorhub/video/upload/q_auto/c_fit,h_1080,w_1920/f_mp4/v1/leaf-prod/234/videos/COBR_Sept_2025_webinar_lb5vja.mp4?_s=vp-1.11.1

If you wanna be even more conservative and assume that they won't manage at all to reduce cerium and lanthanum in the product...let's ONLY use the assumption that ISR will work with all the other optimisation attempts failing, so we use the very low end of the ISR project margins as benchmark, 5$. We use 800ppm TREO as grade of the resource rather than 1000ppm. We use recovery rate of only 50%. We use payability of 70% (assuming failure of reduction of cerium and lanthanum).

So in this scenario with 5Mt annual throughput, we get to 0.8kg of TREO per ton of ore * 5000Mt = 4000t of TREO, 50% recovered through ISR -> 2000t of TREO, 70% payability for MREC -> 1400t of TREO payable @ 5$/kg REO margin -> 7m$/yr profit

2 lessons here imo:

1) The optimisations they are currently working on matter a million times more than MRE, because 42m$ profit is completely different from 7m$ profit per year and there'll be more than enough resource size even if for whatever reason it'd be only 50Mt (10 year mine life in that scenario still)

2) If ALL the optimisations fail, it's still 7m$/yr profit from Boland with 5Mt/yr production, as long as ISR is viable, each year for 10 years, so 70m$ lifetime profit when picking the most conservative estimates from all the ranges above (resource size, grade, margin, recoverability, payability). Then you have the 15m A$ from the Barton deal, and all of Manna Hill for free on top. I mean good for us that everybody just seems to look at tonnage with REE projects despite the margins/kg ranging from 15$ loss/kg to 20$ profit/kg, but feels harder and harder to argue that the mcap isn't very disconnected from fair value unless (!) fully assuming that ISR is a no go (and, for that matter, also assuming that Blue Rose skarn is a no go)

Iturner, as in the post earlier, I'd recommend you watch last week's webcast, as it answers all of your questions (and likely more):

https://investors.cobraplc.com/webinars/6rkdZP-option-to-acquire-a-significant-copper-project

Long story short if you don't want to watch it: A lot of the current work is on identifying the high-grade zones of the Yaninee resource that were acquired in Q2 to complement Boland given the same mineralogy, to bring that into the same MRE instead of drip-feeding everything and the MRE is on track to be released within the next 3-6 months. The rest of the current work is on ways to reduce the low-value REEs (cerium, lanthanum) in the product, to further increase the margin $/kg REO, which as an ISR operation already look like they'll be 5-20 $/kg, see slide 8 of the webinar slides for the margin of ISR resources, but would likely be at the higher end of that range if they successfully manage to reduce the low-value REEs.

That slide is absolute key, it's amusing how fixated people are about resource size for REE, when - as you can see on that slide - the margins really depend on the type of resource (hard rock, clays) and on the type of mining (ISR is the game-changer). Let's say COBR are reasonably successful at removing the low-value metals from the product and end up middle of that margin range, say 12$/kg (would think that 20$ is a stretch as likely opex in China is far lower), and let's say for simplicity that the resource will be 1000 ppm TREO (so 1kg TREO per ton of ore), which looks reasonable from the past results we saw from Boland, might be 800, might be 1200, but around there.

Alright, then all that's needed is 5Mt of ore processed -> 5000t of TREO contained, let's say 70% recovery through ISR, gives 3500t of TREO product. 3500t * 12$/kg margin = 42m$ profit per year. We need to reduce it maybe if the margin shown in the slide does not account for payability % of MREC (discount for necessary downstream processing) that is usually 70% industry standard, but according to the webinar 80-90% is likely if they manage to reduce Cerium and Lanthanum, let's use the conservative success case again and use 80%, so that leaves us at 33.6m$ profit per year and a 20-year operation with "only" a 100Mt resource.

That's why they walked away from the REE at Wudinna even though the exploration target there was 100s of Mt. It's all about the margins, it's all about ISR, and a 100Mt ISR resource at Boland would very very likely produce higher profits than the 1Bt non-ISR resource Meteoric have in Brazil for instance.

I get it that Mt numbers are flashy "oh, they have a 1 billion ton resource!!!", but rare earths are at least in their current environment all about quality over quantity for the real profits.

That said, I still think we will eventually have close to 500Mt lol

So overall timeline is very much on track, I recommend watching the webinar from last week Iturner.

The MRE is by year end or early 2026 for a very good reason, they want to add the high-grade zones from the Yaninee resource that have been acquired here:

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/COBR/land-acquisition-for-boland-project-expansion-ayuj38h2meym37l.html

and proven here:

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/COBR/rare-earth-isr-system-beyond-boland-752ni5914pain8b.html

into the MRE, which means that we could well get a rather sizeable maiden MRE of >50Mt and possible already in the maiden one 100Mt

& adding some other key things to Trombone's list that also at some point over the next months:

- Warrant exercise RNS (the 3p warrants bring in over 1m£ in cash, keep in mind that over the past 7 years Cobra have done all of what they've done so far, including the money they needed to buy 100% of Wudinna from Andromeda at the time, with less than 10m£ cash raised over those years IN TOTAL)

- Growth and Infill drilling campaign starting soon at both Boland and Blue Rose (both of those fully funded through the cash still in the account & Barton cash, so don't need warrant cash from that yet even)

- Non-dilutive finance (Rupert mentioned R&D grant applications in the webinar)

- ISR in-field test results (assuming that wasn't meant by Trombone under workflow optimisation and that he instead meant the work on reducing Cerium and Lanthanum in the product)

- production of larger amount of MREC to send to potential offtakers

Kinda feels like 1 bigger holder selling pretty aggressively, rather than lots of selling interest, a bit odd how they handle it if that's the case, these volumes could be executed with much less market footprint and they would get out of their position at a much better price, but god knows. Would be interesting to know the motives, maybe that person needs the money to buy a house or something, because selling very shortly before an asymmetric news event (as is the 1000+ samples that we get within the next 2 weeks or so given that they can only add to the number of high-grade zones at Yaninee, but not taking any away) seems like not exactly an optimal strategy.

It's weird how quickly buying interest cedes here still though, despite all the great fundamentals and upcoming catalysts, it takes 1 day of a person getting out of their position and suddenly the people who were buying above 6p (and IMO rightly so given the fundamental prospect) aren't here to buy more at 5.30p? Quite different retail behaviour still from EEE, there price dropped from 82 to 62 last week and already back at 73 with steady persistent buying.

No idea, either people already have their position sized to the extent they want it to be going into the upcoming heavy news flow months that Rupert mentioned in the webinar, or they are still very complacent about it, thinking "I can still increase at that price in a month anyway"...which...is possible, but let's remember that everybody also thought that at 1p handle "Nah, I can just hold off now and maybe buy at even lower price"...and that was true, until it absolutely wasn't.

Either way, it's just what AI came up with, so can't put massive weight into it and can't be used as investment advice, but given that was what it came up with after being fed with all RNS and Presentation slides, found it interesting to share

6. Relative valuation gap

Cobra mcap = £47m at 5.35p.

Peers:

IXR (Uganda ISR clays, weaker metallurgy) ~£56m.

RBW (Phalaborwa, SA) ~£110m.

MKA (Songwe, Malawi) ~£135m.

Meteoric (Brazil clays, pilot stage) ~£200m+.

Aclara (Chile, $1.5bn capex) ~£210m.

Cobra has arguably the strongest metallurgy (ISR at near-neutral pH, first MREC) but trades at the bottom end of this range.

------------------------------

Summary Proposition

Cobra Resources has:

Boland – a globally competitive ionic clay REE project, technically de-risked, ISR-amenable, first product already produced.

Funding cushion – Barton deal + warrants provide non-dilutive inflows through 2026.

Diversified upside – copper/gold (Blue Rose, Manna Hill, Netley) and uranium (ISR roll-fronts).

Market cap just £47m – materially below where peers with less advanced metallurgy trade.

👉 Value proposition: At 5.35p, the market is pricing Cobra as a speculative explorer. In reality, it already has peer-leading metallurgy, a pathway to bottom-quartile costs, a near-term maiden Boland MRE, and funded runway. That makes the current mcap anomalously low vs risk-adjusted upside.

--------------------------

Scenario Ladder

Scenario

1) Downside

Boland MRE comes in 200 Mt), bottom-quartile costs at near-neutral pH, strategic/OEM partnership emerges. Blue Rose defines multi-Moz AuEq resource.

10% Probability

£1.5–2.0bn mcap

----------------------------------

Weighted Expected Value

20% × £27.5m = £5.5m

40% × £225m = £90m

30% × £550m = £165m

10% × £1.75bn = £175m

Total risk-adjusted EV ≈ £436m

...I would change a thing or 2 maybe, but interesting that AI comes up with similar EV that I had in mind as my base case scenario from last week

Spent some time feeding ChatGPT every single RNS of COBR ever since 2018 and all corporate presentations and asked it to tell me about COBR's value proposition - of course AI doesn't know everything, but still interesting what it came up with

1. A unique ionic clay REE system – ISR ready

- Boland discovery is globally unusual: ionic adsorption mineralisation, thick, laterally continuous, and with ideal host geology for ISR (permeable sand horizons, clay caps).

- Metallurgy de-risked:

--Bench-scale ISR recoveries up to 93% NdPr, 89% DyTb at modest acid (pH 2.5–3).

--Feasible at benign pH ~5 with ~50% recoveries, acid use as low as 1.6 kg/t (vs 30–50 typical for peers).

--First MREC produced Jan 2025 – 62.4% TREO, 14.5% HREO, negligible impurities (U 34 ppm, Th 100 km², ISR intercepts across multiple horizons.

-Maiden Boland MRE (due late 2025/early 2026) is the next catalyst — even a 50 Mt @ 800 ppm ISR resource would re-rate Cobra into the £200m+ peer bracket.

4. Funding largely de-risked through 2026

-Barton Gold sale: delivered cash + shares (A$1m to date, up to A$14m more). Barton equity tranches begin monetising in 12 months.

-In-the-money warrants (~£5m): exercisable 2025–27, providing staged inflows.

-Together with YE24 cash, Cobra has £8–9m runway secured, limiting near-term dilution.

5. Copper & uranium optionality

-Blue Rose skarn/porphyry: shallow high-grade Cu-Au intercepts (up to 2.2% Cu over tens of metres, plus gold hits). Comparable to Cadia/Havieron style systems, district-scale potential.

-Manna Hill option: staged deal on a Cu-Au project with 2.2% Cu rock chips, giving a second high-impact growth leg.

-Netley Hill anomaly: >3bn t porphyry-scale geophysical target.

-Uranium rights retained across palaeochannels (Kattata, Yaninee, Pureba, Smokey Bay), leveraging SA’s ISR-uranium expertise.

-These assets are essentially free at the current valuation.