Member Info for SloppyG

Tend to agree that the project will likely become increasingly US centric.

I guess the challenge for Mike is the difficulty in putting pen to paper (even if only MOU) with any partners until the full extent of any DFC involvement and attached conditions becomes apparent. I do believe the DFC have 1st dibs although one would presume the final 1.5m tranche will be required to trigger that.

I guess they also need to be mindful of the fact that the intended SPG partner offering operational (processing) expertise to the JV is a Chinese entity hence would China put up any blockers to that knowledge sharing given how trade is currently playing out.

I don't envy Mike having to navigate all these moving parts although in some ways a nice problem to have given the apparent high levels of interest from all over.

To be fair 99, that just relates to US testing.

Asia was covered off in the RNS @ 2 Sep, so perhaps can see why some getting a little twitchy !

There are so many moving parts at the moment and Bres are, to a degree, caught between a rock and a hard place what with trying to conclude the DFS but also managing relationships/partners with potential conflicts of interest and DFC transition/uncertainty etc. Article below has some interesting relevant snippets. My view is there will be so much interest from Asia, US and EU but that Bres have been unfortunate with the timing of their DFS; 6 months either side and probably would have had a bit more clarity.

Anyway personally very confident of a positive outcome here but for sure some short term timing hurdles to navigate.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c30mjedjzgpo

Tellodrome.

I completely agree with you and not my usual style to engage with imbeciles as such so apologies for clogging up the board. Sometimes on these boards you encounter manipulative t wats like Legal Wolf that post misinformation and they need calling out for reasons stated. Views are clearly shared pretty much unanimously (confirmation bias lol !) Anyway back to BRES. I personally concur that this will become enormous in due course. I cannot recall many opportunities of this scale in my years of investing. The overwhelmingly positive RNS’ being absorbed are creating a coiled spring. Just takes one catalyst to light the flame. A few near term hurdles to clear for sure but exiting times ahead. Time to move on. GLA.

Legal Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing. It’s a pleasure. If I can educate you just a modicum by spending one minute of my time then indeed it is time well spent; plus , in your case, I can charge my time to charity work.

Incidentally can you please share your FRN ? I am considering, like I assume others here, to sell down my entire holding based on your financial advice that it is “inevitable” that the DFC funds will not be forthcoming and hence a fund raise is imminent. Before I hit the sell button just want to make sure I am receiving regulated advice. Thanks in advance.

Not sure if anyone noticed this. Milestones for last 2 x tranche ($1.5m). (v) is still work in progress so perhaps, even aside from any DFC frozen payments, this milestone has not yet been achieved; although must admit don't understand why Bres were saying anticipated a 500k payment in Dec'24 as that does not appear to tie in with the milestone schedule, at least as far as I can see.

(v) US$1,000,000 payable on achievement of completion and submission to DFC of all

required deliverables on completion of the stage resource drilling program and JORC

resource update and related tasks – which are anticipated to be completed in Q4 2024;

and

(vi) US$500,000 payable on completion and submission to DFC of the Final Model and Final

Report to DFC.

There he is it's Wolfy with the predictable cut and paste job. Loving the witty compliment; perhaps next post you could tell us a gag or something anything just to break up the monotony of identical messaging over the last X posts.

You have confirmed my belief that you are "grossly misrepresenting the facts" as it's impossible to exhibit so much ineptitude when simply trying to read the AR and reconcile to the Nov prospectus; especially when you have been handheld through the process. Glad though you are watering down the DFC wording to a risk from the previous inevitability. Probably advisable.

Sorry about GEX. I guess it was close to your heart. My bad what was your entry point 19.5p ? Love to know your average when bailed as we could all perhaps learn something about the art of timing you keep preaching on about and we can then see how it's done by the pros.

People like yourself have a modus operandi. Stocks you own you incessantly ramp all day and accuse anyone with any view to the contrary of spreading "FUD" to get in cheaper. Stocks you are considering owning you try to subtly deramp and then accuse anyone with a view to the contrary of having "confrimation bias". FUD and Confirmation basis. Wow you sound a cracking guy to have a beer with. Perhaps you could bring print outs of your last 1000 C&P posts to muse over.

Its fairly apparent to everyone you that as soon as you are challenged the subtle niceties very quickly disappear and you flip. A Wolf in Sheep's clothing ? As i said if you cannot take it......

I will leave you alone shortly love as sense you are of a fragile disposition. I think everyone can now see you for what you really are and the apparent agenda inherit within all your posts. People like yourself need to be called out so job done.

Good luck with unearthing the next GEX (oops sorry!).

All imho and DYOR.

Lol reel the Wolfman in once again. So utterly predictable. You really do offer fantastic comedy value. What is it they say if you cannot take it........

So when you lumped into GEX at 20p+, averaged all the way down to low single figures, incessantly and irresponsibly I might add pumped it on a daily basis, accused those that did not follow your rhetoric of spreading FUD, ignored the advice of the intellectually superior like myself warning you, before bailing with your tail between your legs at c6p for significant losses then what we all would like to know - had you considered the risk profile of your investment decision as a retail investor and also did you give due consideration to the timing of said further purchases on the way down ?

Meanwhile back on Bres. Jeez you can lead a horse to water but in your case I am starting to doubt even that.

The AR, as I have already proven to you, confirmed precisely the messaging from the Nov prospectus in that the expanded DFS is 100% covered by the Nov raise but that WC funds will be required within the GC assessment period (12m from Jan25). You simply either cannot read or you are blatantly misrepresenting the facts in which case you are sailing very close to the wind Wolfman. Only you can answer this. Then again maybe you can't.

Re. DFC monies of course it's a risk you absolute muppet ! I was one of the first to point that out here. If those monies are not forthcoming then there will clearly be a need to seek further funds and in good time. It's impossible to determine the likelihood of this however at present as no-one has the facts; yet you still choose to say "all but inevitable". Misrepresenting the facts once again Wolfman ? Naughty Naughty !

Btw do you have any other long tips such as GEX with a similar retail investor risk profile as I am looking for a couple of easy win shorts to balance the portfolio. I just need to get the timing right as a good friend of mine told me that's key.

For anything else pic12 just about summed you up far more eloquently.

and of course almost forgot all imho and dyor.

Jeez all kicking off here !

Re. DFC all options were clearly on the table which comes across in their mixed comms and also the fluid nature of the project; sometimes referencing incentivised to provide a full funding solution and other times participating in the overall funding package as the cornerstone debt investor (not the project equity element). Bres have therefore kept all doors open and by all accounts have a number of willing participants. Syrah recently got $150m loan commitment off the DFC for what appeared a fully funded solution so there may have been some read across here.

We also have to remember that it is also only very recently that they have finally decided upon the 3 phased production strategy. Phase 1 only c£10m to fund and in Mike's own words that is too small for the DFC (AFC now step in), Phase 3 has the MOU for 50% of the capital costs of the SPG facility to be funded by Triessence; hence there is now no such thing as a single partner fully funded solution in any case.

Re. future funding requirements the company have made it perfectly clear that working capital funds would be required at some point in the next 12 months. The DFS was fully covered by the Nov raise (written in B&W). Obviously if the final 1.5m DFC tranche does not land then any WC funding requirement will need to be pulled forward from the back end of this year. It's just a risk as simple as that.

Ultimately we all have a different appetite to risk and make choices accordingly; some like the risk profile of of GEX at 20p+, others that of of Bres 3-5p . You pays your money right.

@Scaffman. One would presume that to be the case if Bres have met all the required milestones and payments were not forthcoming.

I would be astounded if the DFC, in whatever guise they reappear, walk away completely from Orom Cross but who knows.

Agreed wavecrest they are unquestionably fully funded (subject to DFC funds landing). Not too difficult to spot those with an agenda right - whether intentional or not make ones own mind up.

DFC funds are however clearly a risk and I suspect even Bres are somewhat in the dark at this juncture, even though they appeared confident they would be forthcoming in their most recent update; perhaps a slight delay only so lets see. Anyway as someone else stated it's time for a new topic !

Nov prospectus:

"The Company had originally budgeted $10m to complete the DFS, however, following recent

consultation with the DFC the Company will now pursue a larger mining operation thus requiring

additional drilling to build further inventory of mineral resources (“Expanded DFS”). Therefore, as a

result of additional drilling forming part of the Expanded DFS the budget for the Expanded DFS has

increased to $12m, an increase of $2m (£1.5m) which had been budgeted to complete the DFS. The

Company will complete the Expanded DFS for the increased budget of £1.5m in H1 2025. In

addition, the Company has also budgeted a further £1m for general working capital. Therefore the

Board estimates that the total amount of additional working capital required during the Working

Capital Period is £2.5m.

The Company has carefully designed a budget of £2.5m to be financed from a combination of capital

raised by the Company and drawing down the next 2 tranches of the TAG from the DFC. The Company

will finance the Expanded DFS budget of £1.5m from existing cash resources and Net Proceeds of the

July and November Subscription which is approximately £1.6m. The Company estimates that it will have

a working capital shortfall of approximately £0.9m and expects to meet the shortfall by drawing down

the tranches of TAG from the DFC which amount to $1.5m (£1.1m). The Company expects to receive

the next TAG tranche of $0.5m from the DFC before 31 December 2024 and the balance tranche of

$1m in H1 2025, in accordance with the tranche milestones set by the DFC.

If the DFC TAG funds are not received, the Company would be required to raise further capital to meet

its working capital shortfall of £0.9m. The Company has complete control on the timing of cash

expenditures and has no contractual obligations to spend capital on the Expanded DFS. Therefore, if

the DFC funds are delayed or are not received, the Company could delay the completion of the

Expanded DFS"

Indeed.

Meanwhile 1.75p bid again seems to trigger and bit of selling to curb the rise; no doubt those that took part in the 2.1m placing back in April'24 also at 1.75p.

@KB5. To be fair the going concern aspect of the AR is effective as of the date the accounts are signed hence it is 12 months forward looking from 30 Jan.

My point is simply that the company have never unequivocally stated that they have insufficient funds to meet the DFS liabilities and hence will need to raise more cash to cover the DFS shortfall.. Their GC statement is a general one that covers all working capital requirements over a 12 month period. The last unequivocal written statement from the company in this regard appears to be the late Nov ones to accompany the raise - “ now fully funded to deliver the DFS in H1” etc

I agree that the current DFC position poses some risk re. the final 1.5m tranche and have stated as such. It would be naive therefore to assume that a raise will not be required in due course given changing circumstances. I am Interested though that you consider the DFC as dead. Everything I have read points towards a likely reauthorisation of the DFC and if anything it will come back a different animal with perhaps more autonomy and even greater budgets for projects such as BRES’. You see it differently ?

There he is the Wolfman is back. Reel him in. This is simply too easy.

You clearly do not know how to read a GC statement and keep posting the same utter nonsense which completely contradicts your messaging. It's fine not everyone understands an AR and the statements inherent within it but please do not try and pretend you do. Stick to the basics Wolfy as it clearly sits more comfortably with you.

I proved you completely wrong previously with GEX and history is repeating itself Fudman; apology accepted btw.

Loving the supercedes angle now when presented with something that conveniently contradicts your messaging; failing to again understand you have not read the AR properly so there is no said superceding to consider.

Keep spreading the FUD Wolfy (in your own words). The pleasure is mine........

LW. I disagree. The funding requirement is WC to see them to Jan 26 (pretty standard). The post YE raise covers the DFS and the company have made that clear on several occasions; otherwise they would have to be explicitly clear that they have insufficient funds to pay for the DFS (due imminently) and highlight this in the business risk section given its materiality.

A brief search found this deck which accompanied the Nov raise. Last slide "now fully funded to deliver the DFS in H1". There are other references (MB post on Nov RNS) and also Mike presentations etc confirming as such but I simply don't have the time or inclination to trawl through them all. It's not to say however that things cannot change re.funding (DFC issues etc).

https://www.lse.co.uk/media/BRES/blencowe-resources-placing-subscription-retail-offer-p7jy4v0l5jw1cvr.html

Btw on the subject of your much appreciated "timing" lesson how's it going over at GEX ? You cannot say I didn't warn you. A wise man once told me it's all about the timing; and try to avoid investing in those with loads of warrants flying around and impending dilution. The irony is not lost !

That same wise man also stated that those who constantly post the same negative messaging over and over again are simply spreading FUD in order to obtain a cheaper entry price. Oh to be so wise hey ?

With this statement they are not saying that they do NOT have enough cash to cover the DFS but simply that they do not have enough cash to see them through until the end of the Going Concern period; the GC period ends 31 Jan 2026, so 12 months from publication/signing of the AR.

So in summary they are saying: the DFC money alone does not cover the DFS, therefore the raise after YE has to cover the DFS shortfall; which will then still result in a WC requirement to see them though until the end of the GC period (Jan 26).

Everyone should be fully aware that they don't have 12 months cash runway @Jan 25. The DFS is however fully funded for sure as Mike has said on a number of occasions that to be the case post raise. The caveat to this will be any issues with the DFC final tranche and/or any unforeseen costs.

The business should be in a very different place post DFS (H2) and any working capital requirements at that juncture will be part of the wider funding discussions; of which it is abundantly clear there are many interested parties.

The pegging of the SP is in my view simply due to a broken junior market (gold aside). The market just sees risk everywhere especially in the pre-production phase. Bres is a classic coiled spring imo with a constant flow of exceptional news just being absorbed to no avail; one or two catalysts unlock the whole thing

I am personally expecting fireworks at some point in H2. All imho and DYOR.

It is indeed. I have also taken a position in PAT as it really does appear that the government have committed an own goal with the auction process that effectively attributes some sort of economic value to the expropriated asset.

One thing of interest is their recent raise was to provide some funds for working capital as this was not covered by their 13m "facility" with LCM. I note however that when Emmerson announced they had secured litigation funding they were clear that it also covered working capital requirements. One would assume that financiers would cover this as they need to ensure the company can remain a going concern throughout what could possibly be a lengthy arbitration process. Do we think it is different for PAT as they also have another asset in their portfolio ? Trying to work out the likelihood of Emmerson requiring another WC raise in due course or whether that is essentially covered by the 11m funding.

"Emmerson Plc, the Moroccan focused potash development company, is pleased to announce that it has signed a Capital Provision Agreement ("CPA") with a specialist litigation funding firm to provide up to US$11,000,000 in both litigation finance capital and working capital for the Company (the "Funding") "

Https://www.listcorp.com/asx/syr/syrah-resources-limited/news/us-150-million-dfc-binding-loan-for-balama-3108030.html

I guess BRES would have been looking for a similar DFC loan to that offered to Syrah back end of last year. Presumably the binding element would have been some sort of guaranteed offtake to US firms.

I tend to agree though that these sort of loan arrangements will no longer cut it with Trump administration. They will want to see real tangible benefits no doubt in the form of equity. That being said BRES should be in fantastic position post DFS and the US will not want to lose out on this to other interested parties so will be fascinating to see how it plays out.

Are we sure the DFC 5m grant is repayable ? Extract from the latest Feb'25 presentation below implies that is not the case. More importantly for now we do need confirmation that the final 1.5m tranche is not caught up in the freezing of foreign aid/grants. The DFC is clearly in transition so, although not a huge amount in the grand scheme of things, it would not be ideal as we look to finalise the DFS in the next few months. Next weeks presentation will hopefully clarify the position.

Orom-Cross is the first pre-production graphite project worldwide to be funded by a

US Government grant via the DFC.

Partnering with DFC preserves all of the Orom-Cross project equity;

✓ Technical Assistance Grant does not require any repayment – hence completely non-dilutive.

✓ Orom-Cross valuation will rise significantly over next 6-12 months once DFS is completed.

Substantially de-risks the Project through involvement of a tier-one funding partner

who will be incentivised to provide a full funding solution for Orom-Cross.

Interesting, so if the market values this at 5% of a $2 Bn submitted claim then c$100m MC which is pretty much in line with what I posted below (SP 7.3p). Perhaps there is some logic to those assumptions after all.

Really not sure about the timings re. SOC. It feels like they are on fast forward with this arbitration case, although this element of it is presumably one of the most important aspects so need to get it right.

Not always the case IPA. I am a LTH and have been pretty scathing of the the company's prospects. Fortunately I took 30% off the table at c3p old money so have more than covered myself. No prizes however as was sitting on a small fortune at one point !

Personally I have been looking for any reason to top up at this price but there are so many red flags that simply make it uninvestable at present (imho). If we start to see some evidence that they are reaching a sustainable b/e position and that the PDMRs have some skin in the game (options/director buys etc) then I would be all in. I just cannot see it however and think the so called pivot has come too late in the day to save them. Delist (administration or taken private) is where my money is if had to bet.