Member Info for Stiperstones

Excellent post Winvestor.

I’ve recently been reading up on the history of the oil industrial complex and its impact on worldwide growth (and hence worldwide stock and commodity markets). The very fact that oil is traded in USD has knock on effects I hadn’t even thought of in great detail. It’s allegedly one of the reasons (if not the main one) that the US went into Venezuela recently.

Apparently, the Chinese were honing in on Venezuelan oil with a potential to detach from trading it in USD. If that had happened the economic impact around the markets might well have been dramatic (to say the least).

The problem researching I find, is that the authors often have their own agendas so you need to be able to read between the lines and source multiple views.

I find it all fascinating.

Kind regards.

Dusty,

Re: “Are the Telegram (group) unable to answer these questions?”

I've found Telegram to be educational, like this board can often be, and different perspectives can be helpful in my humble opinion.

It’s simply that for me, my brain works better reading from the LSE board forum style. The ‘mobile phone’ style/layout of Telegram isn’t so user friendly (for me anyway).

Kind regards.

Thanks for the replies on this thread.

It’s certainly sent me down a rabbit hole in terms of further reading up around the potential procedures, processes and shareholder advantages and disadvantages. For example one of the things I’ve delved into threw up the subtle distinctions in terminology:

- Cross-listing: A single legal company lists the same shares on multiple exchanges (common approach).

- Dual-listed company (DLC): Two legal entities operate as one economic business with separate share registries (more complex, seen in some legacy resource majors).

For most AIM-quoted explorers ( Empire Metals), the outcome will be akin to the cross-listing model—one set of shares that trades on multiple exchanges.

The legal and regulatory processes for each differ.

Lots more detail to read on.

Kind regards.

Thanks GB and Dusty for your prompt input.

Further publicly exposing my lack of knowledge in this area, I take it that EEE creates new shares to be sold only in Australia and that this effectively dilutes our shareholding? The advantage to us as shareholders is the inflow of new capital into the business. The disadvantage is that our individual shareholding as a percentage of the overall total number of EEE shares in existence is reduced: the reduction being equivalent to the number of shares issued in Australia divided by the total of all shares (all existing shares plus those newly issued in Australia).

Directly related to the above point is how likely is it that EEE will discount the launch price of the SP in Australia (comparative to the then current SP in the UK) to encourage new shareholders? If this is a likely scenario, then am I stating the obvious that UK shareholders might experience (suffer?) a double-whammy in that:

(a) our shareholding is diluted (as per the first paragraph) and

(b) our UK SP might likely drop (at least initially) to reflect the launch discount in Australia?

Forgive my ignorance, but as I said when I opened this thread I have no experience of how a dual UK/Australia listing will work so I’m looking at risks and potential mitigations.

None of the above cause me undue concern as I have a mid-long term view on EEE: I’m simply seeking to manage my own expectations and understand what lies ahead in terms of the proposed listing.

Kind regards.

Hi all,

I’m sticking my head above the proverbial parapet and reaching out for views, shared experience and expertise please. I’ve started my own research and hope to gain further practical insights from members on this board.

I was reading several posts on the EEE Telegram group on the issue of us listing on the Australian stock market. It started me thinking about the mechanics of this. I find the format of this board on LSE easier to follow than the Telegram forum, hence starting this thread. Apologies to those from the Telegram group in that respect.

Even though I consider myself an experienced investor I must admit to having no knowledge of how opening a listing on the Australian stock market works in practice or the impact it would have on our UK listing SP.

I got royally shafted on a six figure investment when TUI did a rights issue a few years ago, an experience my bank balance didn’t enjoy.

Hence, I’d like to know your thoughts, experiences and expectations in this specific respect of EEE listing in Australia.

Thanks in advance.

Perspective on “Circle the Wagons” and Recent Price Action

I have a mid-long term view on Empire and I remain constructive on the company’s future, but I think it’s fair to reflect on how expectations were set last summer and how the market has responded since. Ahead of the maiden MRE, the share price ran hard and fast and SB’s “circle the wagons” comment at the time inevitably added to a sense that something market-moving was imminent. In hindsight, that phrasing may have contributed to short-term expectations getting ahead of themselves. It certainly raised my expectations (and I’ve been investing for over 40 years).

The MRE itself confirmed what many of us already believed: Pitfield is a very large, globally significant titanium resource. From a strategic standpoint (in my opinion anyway) it strengthened the long-term investment case. But the market reaction was telling: the SP ‘tanked’ shortly after and we’ve since seen a similar pattern where objectively positive RNSs are followed by weakness rather than strength in the SP.

As an experienced investor, I don’t see this as unusual. Anticipation tends to be priced in well before delivery, especially in early-stage resource stocks. When progress is steady but incremental, the market often uses news flow as liquidity rather than as a reason to re-rate. That said, I do think the “circle the wagons” narrative raised expectations unnecessarily in the short term. Empire remains a development story — drilling, metallurgy, pilot work, funding and timelines matter more than soundbites. The value, if it comes (and in my best estimates, it will), will be built over years, not on individual RNS days.

None of this changes my core view. Pitfield remains exceptional as far as I’m concerned, the Board appears laser-focused on execution, and the strategic relevance of titanium isn’t going away. But I think shareholders are now adjusting to a more realistic cadence of progress, which may explain the counterintuitive price action.

For me, this is about patience and perspective. The opportunity hasn’t disappeared, far from it, but the timeline was always longer than the market briefly convinced itself it was (including me).

Interested to hear how others see the last few RNSs versus price action and whether expectations have now been fully reset.

AI summary (just for ease of reading for those of us not technically minded):

Here are the top 7 takeaways from the RNS, stripped back to what really matters for investors and stakeholders:

Processing breakthrough improves economics

Test work confirms Empire can selectively separate titanium while rejecting most waste material, producing higher-grade concentrates with simpler processing — a clear positive for future costs and margins.

Whole-of-ore flotation delivers strong results

Using a single flotation step across the whole ore body achieved >34% TiO₂ grades and ~70% recoveries, simplifying the flowsheet compared with earlier gravity-based approaches.

Lower-cost titanium extraction route identified

Atmospheric, low-temperature sulphuric acid leaching has shown promising results, potentially replacing more complex and energy-intensive processing methods.

Pilot plant testing imminent

Empire expects to finalise its preferred processing route by the end of Q1 2026, allowing continuous pilot-scale testing to begin shortly thereafter — a key de-risking milestone.

Multiple high-value product pathways confirmed

The project can produce high-purity titanium products suitable for pigments and potentially titanium metal feedstock, increasing flexibility and market appeal.

Infrastructure and export access advancing

A non-binding cooperation agreement with the Mid West Ports Authority opens the door to future port access — critical for large-scale development.

Environmental and permitting risks being reduced

Environmental baseline studies and community engagement are progressing well, helping streamline approvals in a Tier-1 mining jurisdiction like Western Australia.

Here’s an AI created summary of today’s RNS for those who only have 5 mins before work today (AI can make mistakes):

Executive Summary – Empire Metals RNS (27 January 2026)

Empire Metals has made strong progress advancing its Pitfield titanium project in Western Australia and is moving steadily toward the next major development phase.

Recent test work has confirmed that Empire can efficiently separate titanium from the surrounding rock and upgrade it into a higher-quality concentrate using simpler and more cost-effective processing methods than previously tested. Importantly, the company has identified a new low-temperature chemical extraction method that could significantly reduce energy use, equipment complexity and costs, while still delivering strong titanium recoveries.

Empire is now close to finalising its preferred processing route and plans to begin large-scale pilot testing in the first quarter of 2026. The results from this work will feed into a formal Scoping Study, expected later in 2026, which will assess the project’s overall economic potential.

The company has also successfully produced very high-purity titanium products, confirming that Pitfield can supply materials suitable for titanium pigments and potentially titanium metal, opening multiple commercial pathways.

Beyond processing, Empire is making good progress on environmental studies and community engagement, helping reduce approval risks. It has also signed a non-binding agreement with the Mid West Ports Authority, an important step toward securing future export infrastructure.

Overall, the update shows that Pitfield is technically viable, becoming simpler and cheaper to develop, and is advancing on multiple fronts at pace — strengthening its position as one of the world’s most significant emerging titanium projects.

Dusty,

Has the pennant disappeared then (from earlier this month from memory), where you predicted 58/59p?

I’m not a chartist myself, but I am interested in comments from those that do, including where previous predictions might not be achieved due to whatever circumstances.

Genuinely interested.

GB 10:15am - “Anything substantial is probably 2 yrs away here.”

I’ll be happy if I double my current value here in 2 years. It’s all personal choice.

In the meantime, good luck with your portfolio.

Hi Golferboy,

Nice to hear you’ve done well elsewhere and fair play for taking profits when opportunities present themselves.

As ever though, different shareholders will have different strategies – some trade shorter term, others are mid-to-long term holders and not everyone is chasing a quick buck. For some of us, this is very much about backing the company and letting it develop at its own pace and enjoying the journey rather than focusing solely on short-term SP movements.

On the wider point, there actually have been plenty of posts discussing critical minerals in general and titanium in particular, including where Ti currently sits in terms of supply, demand and strategic importance. Views will naturally differ on how “critical” it is today versus where it may be heading, especially as downstream uses and geopolitics evolve.

Totally understand the frustration when other sectors are moving faster, but that’s the nature of markets – different assets run at different times. Good luck with your other investments, and hopefully the patience here is rewarded in due course.

There’s a good chance the markets will wobble this week given the announcement from the US of new tariffs potentially hitting the UK and selected European NATO partners from Feb 1st (and raising again on June 1st unless resolved earlier). The impact might not be as badly felt as last spring but any sectors hit will likely pull down others too out of herd selling.

GLA

RH and Dusty,

Thanks for the prompt responses. It’s disappointing that in a democracy censorship exists on a board like this. I personally don’t like the name calling - nor the use of icons to name call and abuse (because that’s even more childish in my opinion). We left that on the playing grounds as children.

Disagreement is healthy, including vehemently opposing views. The c-suite executives I’ve reported into during my career would sometimes try to use their seniority to push me in a direction I didn’t want but as the expert in my field (which is what they paid me for) I would respectfully stand my ground. It was never popular. So, I used to retort by simply saying “…we’ll just have to agree to disagree” and I’d record that in the meeting minutes.

In terms of recording the posts, I find writing a post frustrating because of the low bandwidth caused by multiple videos etc. I haven’t subscribed to get rid of these so I write my posts in a draft email and copy and paste them into LSE. It’s really frustrating that a site so widely used has so much poor user experience, but that’s another issue.

Best wishes to all.

Morning all. Genuine question. Can anyone explain why this post was removed yesterday please? I can see nothing that would offend or would be sufficient to cause admin to remove it (along with another I posted yesterday). Unless I’m going nuts, it’s just disappeared into the ether.

“Dusty,

I think this is the first company I’ve held shares in (over the decades I’ve been investing) where I haven’t sold some on a high (a usually sudden rise) and bought back on the drop. I’m content to let this one run and run (unless we receive news which would move me to reconsider).

Don’t get me wrong, I nearly cried in my beer when I watched the SP drop from the low 80s to the high 20s. I recall thinking at the time that the oft used phrase “circle the wagons” had cost me dearly. I was annoyed and that phrase just kept ringing in my ears. Indeed, I very nearly submitted a question on the investor relations meeting at the end of 2025 to ask SB if he regretted using that phrase.

But, in the clear light of day, I re-read the RNSs, reviewed the videos I’d previously watched and recalled some of the comments and insights from various posters on this thread. This brought me to the conclusion that the drop was just a bump on our journey.

I really enjoy this board (not the bickering obviously) as I’ve learned some absolute gems from some of the conversations. Here’s to good fortune for all in 2026 and beyond: if it was easy, monkeys could do it (no disrespect to monkeys)!”

NP: 19% - nice one. I’ve always found a rise like that in a short time presents a quandary: do you hold or do you sell! I suppose the answer lies partly in how much you’ve invested in the stock. Well done for the stock selection in the first place!

NP, it might take a while for the SP to reflect the analysis from Canaccord. What it will have done, in my humble opinion, is to further raise awareness of Pitfield and Empire. Other IIs, funds etc, may be awakened by this target and of course will have analysts to perform their own due diligence and assessments. I think the timing of the release, at the very beginning of 2026, is excellent for current shareholders though. Nevertheless, it’s wise to reflect on the old saying that ‘one swallow doesn’t make a summer’. GLA

I used this prompt in ChatGPT where it found very little useful information above what you, RogB and 5x5Croire have already illicited:

Give me an Executive Summary limited to 1 A4 page about a company called Titanium X who are seeking to become a player in the titanium market. Who owns them, when it formed, trading history, etc.

Hi Dusty,

Over time, I’ve learned that I can’t change what has already happened or what I may have said in the past. I try to keep my focus on the present - and on the future, which I hope will be full of opportunity. Looking back at prior comments doesn’t feel like the best use of my time or energy, especially when there is so much ahead to look forward to (with the exception of fond memories of family and friends who are no longer with us).

From that perspective, I choose not to engage with a small number of unconstructive remarks. My hope is that this board continues to be a positive, respectful space - similar to the COBR board - which I see as a great example for current, future, and former shareholders.

This isn’t directed at anyone in particular - just a reflection shaped by life experience.

Here’s to 2026 and beyond. Wishing everyone all the best.

Hi Dustyslay,

I get your drift about where titanium lies in respect of the general critical minerals dialogue. Only time will tell whether various national and geopolitical strategies will take us as shareholders (and the SP) in respect of Empire’s development in the short and medium term.

I will draw a weak analogy here (stay with me until the end of this thread):

- titanium is a common mineral as we’ve previously discussed but it’s the cost of discovery, production and purity that works in our favour

- diamonds are common (relatively speaking) and like titanium it’s the cost of discovery, production and purity (includes the 5 Cs: cut, clarity, carat, colour and certification). Lab-grown diamonds are now readily available and share the same properties and are much cheaper. However, there is still huge demand for the natural stuff in everything from industry to jewellery. Natural diamond prices are controlled by markets. I tell my wife that in reality, diamonds are nearly as common as gravel - if every vault was opened, the price of diamonds would crash overnight.

Like diamonds, there will always be customers for titanium - it just depends on demand and supply where the triggers are ethical, moral, political, geographical and financial in terms of the justification - who wants to buy and for what reason.

I did say at the beginning that the comparison was tenuous, but I trust you can see the analogy.

Just my personal take on this for anyone interested in this debate.

Re: “I have a general question for ML / board. I have a general question for ML / board. What are the risks that this stock goes to zero still?“

Interesting question. My personal opinion is there is zero chance of this retracing to nil point (Eurovision technical terminology) for the following reasons (in no particular order):

- last 24 months’ RNS

- latest videos online from various Empire executives

- geopolitical tensions raising the stakes for secure supply chain

- technical commentary (e.g. from Ageos)

- the plethora of insightful links from various members of this board to regional critical mineral strategies (e.g. US)

- regional tariffs to deter ‘price dumping’ (e.g. Europe)

- Empire’s executive hires (why would some of the new industry-leading appointees join anything that would harm their CVs)

- our institutional investor shareholders (they have the expertise to have done appropriate due diligence)

- the views of PI shareholders, especially (but not restricted to) those like ML and Dustyslay, on boards like this whose commentary challenges every angle (including this thread).

I could go on (but my wife has told me off for texting while we’re in a bar abroad where everyone is singing Country Roads…).