Member Info for ShipwreckSheep

What exactly are you talking about, Cassandra? What's 97p a share?

Not trying to step on anyone's toes (as GGP is a great company), so please feel free to ignore, but saw that Gervaise Heddle retweeted Cobra's tweet about porphyry copper/gold/molybdenum prospect: https://x.com/Cobra_Resources/status/2020756323130814682

Does any of the Greatland OGs have some opinion on it or some useful colour that could help with assessing the likelihood of economic porphyry discovery given the visible sulphides and alteration in their latest drilling campaign? Would be super helpful for analysis as there's not too many LSE companies where investors have followed all the way through from early exploration to big porphyry discovery like you guys did.

That's hard to say without any official channel (either a government agency, or Cobra) talking about it.

What is certain though is that Cobra was (and is) involved in structuring how the Australian strategic critical minerals reserve should look, with Rupert sitting on the council of AMEC and directly involved in that AMEC submission to the federal government. He talked about that in some detail in the Crux interview on Friday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBlYeMIR9xw

I'm not sure personally if we should even want Cobra to target the US for these things, the US very much has been taking the "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" approach, making deals and frameworks left, right and center, making their own rare earths strategy likely convoluted and inefficient. Too many cooks spoil the broth also in mining. I'd much rather see grants/investment by the Aussie government and being included in Australia's rare earths strategic reserve discussions is a very good sign. I would also love to see Japan getting involved, either on government side or industry offtake. Japan is likely one of the hardest hit if they fully cut ties with China (and especially with the election results and more hawkish security strategy as one of the PM's goals that's likely sooner or later) and they already are involved with Lynas and get a lot of other critical resources - for instance a lot of their LNG imports - from Australia. Finally when it comes to Europe's rare earths strategy, Cobra should be a very natural fit once mature enough given ESG is a thing in Europe (even with the US drifting away from it more and more) and a deposit in a country where human rights, labour rights etc are high-standard & confined aquifer ESG ticks all boxes on the environmental front, will almost certainly look extremely interesting to them.

In the end, any 1 of these is more than enough, CAPEX for getting to production on rare earths front is something like 75m USD, that's not going to be any problem whatsoever with normal project finance without any government involvement. It's not like we need 1bn+ USD in CAPEX like hard rock resources.

"Paleozoic porphyry-style hydrothermal alteration and mineralization has previously been recognized

within the Delamerian Orogen, South Australia, where porphyry prospects include Anabama Hill, Netley Hill,

and Bendigo."

"Porphyritic stocks, dikes, and aplites with ages of

470–460 Ma are the most likely hosts to porphyry-style mineralization in the Delamerian Orogen that appear to

have formed simultaneously with the oldest known porphyry systems in intraoceanic Macquarie Arc (e.g.,

Marsden, E43, and Milly Milly; 467 – 455 Ma). These results emphasize the significance and potential of Early-

Middle Ordovician intrusive systems to host such a type of magmatic-hydrothermal mineralization in the

Delamerian Orogen."

You literally have peer-reviewed journal papers about porphyry mineralization there: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/preview/1948464/1948452AAM.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjn1PH51MmSAxW4dUEAHQXmMsYQFnoECB4QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2V8pEUOxNsqBFHJ5MsneaS

But you clearly know more than these researchers?

Actually think it might be this one, Rog, so it has been in an RNS (the original Manna Hill option RNS):

o [RCBR022] 80m @ 0.27% Cu incl. 15m @ 0.71% Cu, 0.17 g/t Au (1m @ 2450 ppm Mo)

That mentions only 1m at 0.245% Moly, but I guess the 4-8m at 0.2% Moly must be from that hole too.

That would certainly be nice, 0.2% Moly would be 1.16% CuEq given the close to 6x price tag. But agree with you there, until it is in an RNS it doesn't count much.

100%, but I'd add/argue that it's ambitious only in a commercial sense, not in a geological/metallurgy sense.

The scale is there, as he talks about in the interview also with the Head metallurgy consistent with Boland. And the cost metrics are well underpinned by the metallurgy milestones on acid usage reduction and the general ISR process which has also been validated by the in-field hydrology study.

"Cobra Resources Targets Rare Earths Production to Undercut Industry by 50% Using ISR"

Article: https://www.cruxinvestor.com/posts/cobra-resources-targets-rare-earths-production-to-undercut-industry-by-50-using-isr

Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBlYeMIR9xw

Actually really encouraging signs that we go into the period of (hopefully) further metallurgical optimization (the lanthanum reduction efforts) & production of the MREC that goes to a handful of prospective offtakers at 4.50p SP. Those 2 news items I imagine once again won't do that much for SP, as they're technical updates, but they do a whole lot for future bottom line.

After that roll on Boland drilling, Blue Rose Stage 1 drill results with already a chance for porphyry hit, Head drilling, Stokes drilling, Blue Rose Stage 2 & 3 drilling, both MREs, Scoping Study, pilot study end of the year. So you asked "Why so quiet" in the thread title, but with all of that we won't have a whole lot of quiet rather soon.

In other news, Rob presenting at the Mineral Sands & Rare Earths Conference in Perth in March:

https://www.informa.com.au/event/conference/energy-utilities/mineral-sands-conference/

I think it's more a case of "it ticks the box", but it was already the expectation, right?

We knew about Head as a 85km2 high-grade target zone since the 4th Aug 2025 and 17th Sep 2025 RNS, we also knew that Rupert considers it to have the right conditions (consistent with Boland, and the same goes for Stokes) from the webinar, and we know that Head was always planned to be part of the growth drilling from the previous RNS that confirms the tenure transfer from TriStar and schedules Head drilling for March/April.

So today does de-risk those expectations that Head geology/metallurgy is consistent with Boland, but it had already been the working assumption for a few months, and they were clearly confident in it or they would not have scheduled it for a drill campaign that's supposed to go directly into the MRE.

27-Jan-26 13:33:24 4.50 2,209,474 99.43k£

Pretty chunky buy from yesterday landed on the trade tape after close..

These are very clearly shifting stocks from general investment account into a tax-sheltered structure or - as Ivar pointed out in the Telegram group - could also be someone who draws down their pension transferring them from a SIPP to a general investment account instead. Either way, they are transfers and don't impact SP.

I mean, unless you think that in 10 years we'll have abandoned electric vehicles, AI, elevated defence investment needs & whatever value humanoid robots or other robots can add to society, then yes. If not, then - for a long-term investment - it's not that huge a factor, cycles come and go and that's the beauty of this rare earths deposit, given Rupert mentioned several times already that the low-cost nature allows it to be profitable at any stage of commodity cycles.

Take late 2021/early 2022, when they did the reanalysis of the Wudinna drill cores and found "hey, there's rare earths overlaying the gold" (which later led them to the actual prize asset, Boland). That was a period when rare earths were red hot, and the REO prices at cycle highs with the shipping constraints during late-stage Covid period. Do you really think that if they had "made hay" at that time, it would have made a difference? In a way they did "make hay", as with Wudinna rare earths, the drilling and MRE progression was very fast. But what did it change?

In the end a mediocre deposit is a mediocre deposit, and the rare earths at Wudinna were just that. So if you remember back then, share price close to tripled on the initial few signs of the REE, and then hype vanished and it converged back to the actual fair value of those Wudinna rare earths project, which wasn't very high.

Conversely, a high-quality deposit is a high-quality deposit, and Boland is exactly that. And as long as the de-risking proceeds, that's what causes the convergence to fair value for the high quality deposit that it is. Personally I prefer the prioritization of metallurgy and hydrology derisking, I mean that flow sheet isn't far from being optimized by now, especially if they manage to reduce/remove lanthanum a bit more in the next step as well (which is one of the tests at ANSTO at the moment). So 2.5 years in, metallurgy and hydrology are by and large de-risked and we are months away from the MRE that will be at least big enough for 10 years of mining and could well be already big enough for 20 years of mining, it's not really all that slow, especially considering that the first half of the year we have several drill campaigns in the exploration programme.

To be fair, losing count on the years is tough, it's only been 2.5 years since they first talked about Boland haha

But I get that it can feel a lot longer because (a) several times along that journey, aggressive timelines were given for MRE and Scoping Study and then delayed for strategic reasons (mainly adding those additional surrounding land packages to optimise for eventual resource scale, or rather avoid that competitors enter the ISR-viable exclusive club by picking the same tenements up themselves) and (b) the reversal of the focus to deridk the metallurgy/hydrology first and then show the resource scale etc, which can feel slow, but in reality is something any rare earths explorer has to do as well, just with the order reversed.

I fully agree that it's time for the MRE(s) and Scoping Study (and ideally PFS) this year, but hey, those items are in the exploration plan for this first half of the year and the first drill campaign is already done and dusted or at least close to finished, so that's not too bad.

Side note on "main market limiting capital raises", that is not entirely true. The rule is just that WITHOUT prospectus a company can "only" raise 20% in addition each given year, but with prospectus that's not a limit. The budget discipline at Cobra is definitely driven by David Clarke, Bruce Parncutt and Craig Ball and a choice rather than an external constraint. Also it's a big reason why many LTHs, me included, can have peace of mind, compared to many many other small caps in mining.

As for the risk of being "forgotten about", why do you think that? I fully agree that I want the project developed as fast as at all possible given that I hold a couple % of the total shares outstanding, but there were very establishes producers in uranium by the time that ISR supplies started coming online and they are now >60% of global supply. I don't think there is that risk of being forgotten about just because it's not ready tomorrow, there's always space for a bottom-quartile cost ISR deposit, the ones that need to rush their development far more are the ones that are at best marginally profitable...and yes, it helps if we're ready just as fast, but it's far less crucial for a ultra-low AISC ISR operation than for most others.

3) Jurisdiction. The only reason there is such a focus on rare earths right now is that of supply resilience, as China weaponized its rare earths once again. So if you're an industrial company and say "Those export restrictions put our entire operation at risk, we need to add an alternative max-stability supply chain", are you going for a mining firm supplier in Malawi? Or Burundi? Or Madagascar? Or Australia? Exactly. And what also helps a ton about Australia is that one of the 2 producers outside of China (Lynas & MP) is an Australian company that might well want to diversify away from only having its low-margin (and sometimes negative margin) hard rock resource.

4) Those above are just the advantages that Cobra's REE resource has from a pure project standpoint. But in the end it's about the people managing the projects too. And there, well, we have 3 members of the Cobra team that have prior ISR experience in uranium, 1 of them is a successful geologist with 5 decades of experience, they are heavily invested in the company keeping budget discipline a given & dilution at a minimum. And it's nice to have that peace of mind with a junior mining company.

5) Okay, I don't want to write much about copper, but we do have very high grades in that skarn and the IP survey validates all possible skarn signals that it tested for, adding a 1.2km strike target to the existing 1.6km strike that is defined from historic drilling, with a further 4km of strike modelled. That would make Blue Rose the largest open-pit copper resource in Australia, competing with Havilah's Kalkaroo. And there's a very much talked about structural copper deficit globally that will only get worse over the coming decade, so open-pit mineable shallow skarn deposits will be the ones needed to fill that gap, as deep porphyries are slow to market.

6) None of the above would matter if we're not talking about fair value. But market values those 2 projects combined at 35m£ (the rest of the market cap are the Barton shares that Cobra holds as strategic investment). Is that a fair valuation for 2 projects that more and more appear to have a good shot at becoming Tier 1 mines? Because that in the end is what should determine if the stock is a "Strong Buy" or a "Weak Sell" or "Neutral". And I understand that everybody can have their opinions on that, but given that it's my post, I can only share mine, and that is: The defined skarn at Blue Rose on its own is likely close to that value once it's infilled. Don't even need to bring the rare earths deposit into it or any strike extension or porphyry at Blue Rose, or Netley Hill, or Golden Sophia.

It's entirely valid not to "put all eggs in one basket". But the entire "Rare Earths aren't rare" mantra has been accurate for 20 years already, and led to the situation that China essentially has monopolized global supply because rare earths are pretty abundant there & were subsidized by the Chinese state (also with low environmental protection/care, which of course allowed them to produce cheaper still).

But that's exactly where Cobra's advantage comes in. Yes, a lot of new REE plays get shouted about, and who can be surprised about that with the president of the US talking about rare earths on a daily basis. However, when it comes to new supply outside of China, there are a few key factors:

1) Yes, it is about supply resilience. But let's not be dumb, if Chinese supply is available and much cheaper, everybody will still buy from there except for times when China restricts exports like now. So the cost competitiveness with China - which is due to the extremely low acid cost which might well still get lower through the orebody acid self-generation optimisation - is absolutely essential. It doesn't matter how many (non-binding) MoUs are signed with explorers/developers outside of China right now, if they aren't competitive on cost front, they will very likely not become producers or at least it's unlikely for the non-binding MoUs to convert to binding sales agreements. Cobra, on profitability per kg MREC metrics is right up there with the biggest-margin Chinese operations, remember that we've been given these metrics by the company already with value/kg MREC as well as the AISC/kg MREC, so that requires little guessing to come up with an estimate (even though it is "just" an estimate still).

2) ISR is such a massive plus. We can ignore that in uranium supply, ISR operations went from 0% of global supply to over 60% of global supply and stabilized there, but why would we? And that's the thing with rare earths, almost nobody has those conditions to use ISR the way it is both viable and unproblematic, because most of these clay deposits are the hilltop-type occurrences like in Southern China where soil and groundwater contamination are a huge issue. With the constrained (impermeable) aquifer that Cobra's deposit sits in those issues aren't a factor and what helps even more is that the groundwater there is hyper-saline and has no use for human consumption or agriculture, so that decreases any such risk further. On the economics side, for profitability ISR stands alone, which has been covered in several presentation decks, the source for those margins/kg is mentioned underneath it, it's not pulled out of thin air. It also is vastly superior in CAPEX needs with 10% of a hard rock mine, and time-to-market is much easier given the mining operation can be started with moving shipping containers.

Good spot Rog, I hadn't even noticed the crazy high uranium & thorium levels in Sovereign's material.

These factors are exactly why rare earths investing requires either understanding the metallurgy/geophysics (and in our case hydrology due to ISR) side well or at least trying to understand it. It's not the first time there's tons of companies shouting like town criers that they have rare earths (that already happened 20 years ago as well before all but Lynas basically gave up and left it to China) - as yes, they definitely are not rare - but that's where the second part of that often mentioned sentence comes in "Rare earths aren't rare, but rarely they can be extracted economically".

Well, to be honest, that Sovereign RNS is nowhere near the quality of Cobra's deposit

SVML mention 21.8% NdPr, 2.9% DyTb, 11.9% Yttrium

Cobra latest optimized TREO is 32% NdPr, 5% DyTb, 23.8% Yttrium

We can throw around dozens of rare earths projects, but that composition of TREO is unique. And 2 years+ of metallurgical/flow sheet optimisation are in the bag, which SVML will need to do too if they want to be relevant, and on acid consumption needs/costs Cobra is by far the lowest (at least that I've come across). So there are no doubt many rare earths occurrences, there's also ones that will be viable, but that SVML RNS for now, without any metallurgy work where 90% of REE projects fall down, that's nothing more than smoke and mirrors and even if that turns out to work for them, they're 2 years behind on a project with worse metrics.

Only if they used their previous years' allowances, otherwise it can be carried forward, so potentially over 200k£ they can transfer into their SIPP

"You can use "Carry Forward" to mop up unused allowances from the previous three tax years."