Member Info for ShipwreckSheep

My pleasure Carribs, glad if it helps.

And it's Saturday now, but that "Friday evening optimism" still holds, RockingHorse. I'm not even sure it is optimism, it's just realism!?

I don't bake in anything like "aaaaand we'll get 5 million quid from R&D grants" or anything like it, mostly just numbers that are known and that were simply in different RNS and needed those dots connected.

I mean, I'm sure that the dual-project focus requires a bit more cash than just Boland did, but worth keeping in mind that Cobra never, not once, even needed more than 2 million quid as budget for a year, so even if we double that for the dual-project status now - which is very unlikely given there's synergies, so it's more likely maybe 1.5x they need, not 2x - that comfortable gets through 2026 and 2027 with the known cash inflow events.

I've tried to piece together all funds currently in the Cobra accounts or flowing in over the coming year - I honestly think we're completely fine until 2027, which is almost crazy given it feels like ages since the previous raise:

£841,842 as of 30 Jun 2025 (we know that from the half-year report)

I assume roughly 300k or so have been spent in the past 4 months - think that's reasonable given no drilling had taken place in Q3 and it was mostly metallurgy, so guess is ~£550k still left from that end of June cash balance.

~£1.3m from warrants executed (assuming that the Company House filing includes the ones from the 9 Sep 2025 RNS, so not adding those extra)

£99,500 received from Barton Gold (200k A$ cash part)

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

leads to guesstimate of *£1.95m* current cash position.

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

Upcoming known cash inflows:

14 July 2026 at the latest: 410k£ from the extension of the director options (2p, 3p, 4p) unless SP lower than currently by then

26 October 2026 pretty sure that the directors were not able to exercise their 3p warrants now given MAR rules, that's another £67k assuming they get extended by a year for them

15 Nov 2026 the 2p warrants expire, that's ~£2m

2 Dec 2026 first tranche of the 2.3p warrants expire, ~£840k

So all in all, £5.2m in budget to plan with until end of 2026, that's cash that we know will flow into the account.

We also hold 6.45 million Barton shares, 40% of those "only" have a 1-year lock period, so in August 2026, we could sell 2.58 million Barton shares, which at current Barton share price is around an additional £1.5m

So there'll be optionality around those Barton shares to have closer to £6.7m budget for 2026 if they need it.

I'm calling it...I'd be very surprised if we need any placing in 2026 at all

Then March 2027 another > £850k from the second tranche of the 2.3p warrants (the last warrants remaining at all at that point) and August 2027 the 60% of Barton shares with 2y lock-up could be turned to cash for another £2.3m (using current Barton share price), so adding that to the 2026 numbers, we have around £10m in cash to spend until end of 2027...

Then you add the *possible* additional cash inflows to those *known* ones, £1m if/when Barton reaches 500k oz MRE for Wudinna, not unlikely at all for that to be before end of 2027 too, any R&D grants from Australian government.

At that time project finance deal for the CAPEX needs should not be a problem and/or credit lines with future offtakers.

Call me a Friday evening optimist, but given Cobra is a company that has raised less than £10m IN TOTAL since 2018, we might not need any raises in future at all.

Great to see Cobra's tweet about in-field ISR test progressing well, will be interesting to see the results.

https://x.com/Cobra_Resources/status/1984181007663448396

Let's remember what we have here: Cobra aren't the only rare earths developer with ionic clays, far from.

But the only one with ionic adsorption of the rare earths elements NOT to impermeable clays, but to highly permeable river sands & surrounded by impermeable clays.

And because in-situ recovery requires permeability, it makes Cobra the only one where real ISR works in environmentally-sound ways.

If you think ISR sounds niche, remember uranium.

It went from zero to 60% of global supply in just a couple decades once proven commercial.

Same logic applies here: lowest CAPEX, lowest OPEX, smallest environmental footprint wins.

Nice! Thanks Rog!

So seems like peer-reviewed validation that the ground is in a true porphyry belt (intrusions define an Early Ordovician Cu-Mo-Au porphyry corridor within the Delamerian Orogen), same deposit type as Cadia and Northparkes, and formed in the same metallogenic window as Australia's big porphyries (Zircon U-Pb ages of 485-465 Ma and Re-Os molybdenite ages of 463-465 Ma...identical to those in the Macquarie Arc).

So it is the exact recipe for large deposits. But it's not the same risk/reward in my mind as Boland and Blue Rose skarn. Both of these are shallow, good grades, with any expansion having walk-up drill targets. Porphyry is, well...expensive...and the risk is that you don't hit anything. And the fact that according to the article the porhpyry system is mostly buried under Murray Basin sediments cover doesn't make it easier either to zone in on the right target. Therefore my conclusion still is: Yes, 3 Fingers of God are very exciting. But timing discipline is crucial. Boland and Blue Rose skarn need to be producing or very close to production in order for it to make sense to spend lots of budget on looking for that porphyry lottery win (as Boland and Blue Rose are far far more than a lottery ticket in terms of success probability).

I sure have been down that particular rabbit hole including the 1898 resource you're talking about (Record of the Mines of South Australia: The Manna hill Goldfield, with Notes and Plans. Adelaide,1898). If you find the full article of the porphyry paper, send it to the Telegram COBRHelp group is possible, I see it's available through Cambridge University library, but sadly no way to access it without a journey to campus.

Agreed, but then again there's another thread that is all "Election Day and then up and away". If the outcome is 100% certain, it's a non-event in both directions, as there's no new information to affect price, so would make both sides disingenuous.

Which sadly is standard these days on this board, will it ever get back to useful discussion rather than just people talking their book shamelessly?

Very pleased with the NTMA process being done, that was the first step of the administrative bottleneck that keeps them from drilling, and we're roughly in line with the timelines given for it. So now transfer of tenure and EPEPR, and then it's Drill, Baby, Drill (all, Boland, Stokes, Head, Blue Rose)

Agree 100%, we just need to acknowledge the stage of the rare earths policy cycle we're in, which is just the very beginning of the process of building out a parallel REE value chain to China. So naturally - with very few investors being familiar with rare earths projects both on the mining side and the refining side - we had a period where most things with ANY rare earths sparked interest, no matter how uneconomical the deposits look or how massive the jurisdiction risk is.

Now's the time for that investor base to mature along with the Western supply chains. Which means gravitation towards projects with the following features:

1) Reliable jurisdiction (Offtakers look for reliable supply of the rare earths they need, otherwise they could just stick to China, so non-binding MoUs might be signed with any project, but BINDING offtake agreements will favour high-quality jurisdictions)

2) Environmentally-sound projects (many of the currently hyped projects with scale will fall down due to environmental permitting and especially economies like the EU that are key users of rare earths will not want to partner with environmentally damaging projects)

3) As high a Dy/Tb content as possible (if China really extends the export restrictions on the October add-ons, that's unlikely to also apply to the original dual-use ones from April, which include Dy & Tb, but not Nd & Pr, so a high Dy/Tb content will allow supply of those without oversupply of less restricted ones including Nd & Pr)

4) multi-decade mine life (obvious that offtakers will want 10y+ of supply security)

5) low-cost producers (low AISC for ultimate resilience to cycles in REE prices that could be more pronounced with 2 parallel value chains, China and non-China)

6) easy access to financing (so ideally low CAPEX)

Most of the REE companies that get discussed a lot more than Cobra don't tick these boxes even half as well as Cobra. That has reasons of course (investors like MRE more than metallurgy, even though metallurgy wins championships, ISR still needs to be full proof of concept in REE, further metallurgy optimisations ongoing), but those reasons are about to get fewer and fewer if all goes to the exploration plan in the latest slide set.

I think the macro/geopolitics picture is super interesting in its own right, just seems more distraction for Cobra at the moment than anything else, given it's not yet on the radar for direct financial deals until that Scoping Study is out.

From that perspective actually the 1y extension from China would be very welcome, if supply-side factors calm now but kick off again in a year, Cobra will be advanced enough and ready to benefit from that on deals front

Lots still not clear about this potential extension, really depends on how the Trump-Xi talks go in South Korea, and even then it's not clear if that extension will only apply for the US or every country. Which is relevant because even though the US - as always - make the most noise, rare earths demand from Europe, and also from Japan, is far far bigger than US demand.

In any case, 1 year makes little difference, there's simply no way for the West to have refining plants up and running in a year's time, so seems like mere China strategy to get something they want (give some REE relief and buy American soybeans vs tariff de-escalation and some relief on semiconductor/chips front)

Sounds like a nice project, Niron Magnetics, somehow given that they started working on that in 2014 and still get described as a start-up in the FT article a month ago, I have a feeling that they won't take over the vast permanent magnets market ;)

But I do root for them, it sounds like pretty cool research.

Given a few new investors over the past 2 months, let's unpack where Cobra, Boland and ISR really excel compared to other rare earths explorers/developers

From a macro view, the US has loudly told every country that isn’t China: “We need rare earths”.

And many REE companies have just as loudly shouted back, often with claims like “We’ll supply 100 % of US demand!” (okay, maybe not 100 %, but you get the idea).

That leads to the natural question: “Won’t this all end in oversupply? What about Cobra?”

Fair question. Let’s break it down.

1️⃣ Why those “we’ll meet 50 % of demand” claims are mostly fluff 💩

They quote design capacity, not actual production.

Demand stats are for separated oxides, while most projects only make mixed concentrates.

Recovery and uptime are assumed to be perfect.

Payability (what buyers really pay) is ignored - industry-standard is 70 % for mixed REEs.

Add it all up, and yes, if you stack all these PowerPoints together, you’d cover global demand multiple times. But 80–90 % of those tonnes will never reach market - they’ll die at permitting, capex, or economics.

2️⃣ Why oversupply still won’t happen

The real bottleneck isn’t ore. It’s processing and purity.

Heavy REE separation is brutal - environmentally and technically. Even if 10 big projects get built, few will consistently produce high-purity Dy/Tb oxides outside China.

So oversupply will exist only in presentations, not in the physical market.

3️⃣ What this means for Cobra

Cobra’s edge is cost and scalability, not tonnage headlines:

ISR = no tailings, no open pits, no acid ponds.

Potential AISC ~$4–6/kg MREC (vs $10–20 for clays, and far higher for hard rock).

Boland’s chemistry (self-acid generation, high HREE ratio for higher payability %, low impurities to start with, high permeability for confined-aquifer ISR) means low CAPEX and easy replication.

Even if REE prices flatten, Cobra’s economics still work. Others need subsidies; Cobra can stand on efficiency.

TL;DR

Most “we’ll meet X % of demand” = fluff.

Oversupply risk = minimal near term.

Cobra = low-cost, high-margin niche that scales where others burn capital.

Hi bamb, given that you are new here (at least haven't seen you in the COBR board before), let me point out that the website is very out of date (the About and Projects sections) and that the best source to get a great overview of Cobra is the slide deck:

https://res.cloudinary.com/investorhub/raw/upload/v1758551504/leaf-prod/234/documents/Cobra_Resources_South_Australia_Critical_Minerals_Company_September_2025_FULL_VERSION_x7civr.pdf

or the webinar incl Q&A that the CEO did in early September (if you are signed up for Investor Hub):

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

Definitely worth noting that Cobra also has a Copper/Gold project with very good historical hits (48m @ 2.2% Cu, 0.78 g/t Au) that we get an MRE for as well in Q1 2026, and additional 2 targets (one Cu/Mo and one Au) that are also in the exploration work plan for the next 12 months.

In addition Cobra hold currently 6.45 million shares in Barton Gold (Australian-listed gold developer) and gets another 2m A$ worth of Barton Gold shares when Barton release 500k of MRE for Wudinna, & another 7.5m A$ in cash from Barton if/when they start production at Wudinna - those things are from the gold asset sale to Barton in June. Cobra also retains the economic rights to the rare earths that overlay the gold resources, that's the historic rare earths MRE on the website, separate from Boland, which is the prize asset and will have much higher grades, bigger scale and looks to be mineable through ISR.

If you already knew all of this about Cobra anyway, my apologies for being repetitive, also always feel free to join the COBRHelp Telegram group where we discuss a lot of things each day

No way GGPThru, Trombone jinxed it because he didn't want it to flatline! haha

Tbf bcb, the RNS for MKA today was only because Canadian investors had driven it up 200% in the last 15 mins of trading yesterday somehow. Given that the company says there was no reason for it they are aware of, seems rather strange that UK has pushed it up 15% from yesterday's London close, as given that the management isn't aware of any factors driving that weird price action yesterday in Canada, nothing has really changed from yesterday's London close about the company. But yeah, rare earths space is a bit weird at the moment, I almost hope it quiets down a bit, it's fine if the sector hype starts again after our scoping study is out :P

Is this you subtly signalling some of the famous GGPThru "flat-lining" for Monday? Or am I reading it wrong?

Not just David actually, Rupert also had warrants, they were from the raise back then in which he participated

I assume we must be getting an RNS about it, yeah. Given MAR, my guess is that David Clarke was unable to exercise his warrants despite them being in the money and that they'll get extended by a year like the options last month, so probably we get a "this is the total amount that has been exercised" along that info.

For now wouldn't seem like a prelude to something sinister, just a healthy correction from rare earths stocks not being up 300% YTD anymore but only 250% on average, mainly driven by large-cap like MP Materials (still +350%), Lynas (still +180%), Energy Fuels (still +200%), Arafura (still +245%).

UK-listed ones just caught in the cross-fire of that healthy correction in majors, unfortunately including quality ones like Rainbow and Cobra in the short-term, but it's temporary and focus will shift back to the idiosyncratic quality no doubt.

100%, Boland/Yaninee/Narlaby is not a 100Mt resource, I have little doubt that if they want to prove it all up, it'll be a 500Mt+ resource. I really hope they won't focus on that, there's no point in proving it up to 500Mt, having 200Mt will be the sweet spot, that's 20y of mining even at 10Mt/yr and works well for DFS, but any other resource expansion I hope they leave for when it's needed, which is a decade in the future. There's better things to focus on in the meantime.

Don't get me wrong, personally I think MRE is gonna be great to have, as it's another hard input into the Boland NPV valuation, but it's the one input that is a rather high-conviction assumption for me anyway, so I guess my expectation is that the main importance of MRE is that it'll lead to commitment from offtakers and institutional investors more easily, and that it is needed to do the scoping study which is likely to be the actual eyeopener for general market, as it will not be "But [Generic REE company] have greater resource", but "Oh...but Cobra's profit margin per kg is 15-20$ and [Generic REE company]'s is 2$".

Honestly think that it's the Scoping Study that is needed to get "general market" excited, Paul. The game changer about Boland is the project economics after all. Maiden MRE/JORC let's say gets to 100Mt at 1000ppm+ TREO, that might not get general market excited, as it's easy to discard without having done research as "yeah, but [insert some REE name] have bigger resource at similar grade". Which is also true, there are enough names with similar or bigger scale, and enough names with similar or bigger TREO content. And general market doesn't care about whether 100-200Mt are enough for 20 years of mining, they still will say "yeah, but [insert some REE name again] have 500Mt".

Where Boland is an absolute beast is the economics. It will be at the very bottom of cost metrics by any miner outside of China, but for that the scoping study is needed. It will also be at the very top from a value of MREC / TREO % perspective given it is more enriched in HREE than the vast majority of other clay projects, but again for that the scoping study is needed. So that what makes me very glad that scoping study is earmarked for only 1-2 months behind MRE as per latest presentation.