Member Info for tedoby

2 of 6

It follows then that the study cannot and should not under any circumstances be used as a basis for an overall financial appraisal of the mine. I've said it before but to reiterate it was never intended to be used for that purpose. Production of WO3 concentrate at the mine will be from several sources including the pit and tailings so obviously to attempt to place an overall value on the mine based on just the underground mine is pointless.

Prior to receipt of the Governments letter received late last December Prem had decided to restart the mine by focussing on the underground workings where it left off over a year ago. The option of constructing a new decline shaft although preferred was not under consideration at that time. Receipt of the Government's letter with the promise of funding appears to have opened up the options completely and overturned that decision now.

The $6m funding will be transformational for both RHA and Prem in many profound ways. Most significantly it will be a demonstration of the Government's full isupport for both the mine and Prem at all levels political and financial. It will also enable Prem to calculate an up to date valuation for RHA and remove the impairment Prem currently carries to name but two.

3 of 6

For my part I believe the Government intend to enter into a revised Shareholder Agreement and invest $6m in RHA quite soon now. I personally don’t need to see the Governments promissory letters to be convinced they exist and their offer is genuine. I believe what the RNS’s are telling us is true. Prem are prevented from disclosing the letters by law and wouldn’t be allowed to do so by the Nomad even if they wanted to. There’s enough professional third parties involved in the reporting process that have a responsibility for me to believe the letters exist and say what we've been told without me having to see them. The indication that this is going to happen and quite soon is extremely compelling. Here are some clear signs but they’re by no means exhaustive :-

There’s been numerous letters referring to the funding since the first promise made in writing by the MOI on behalf of the Government just before Christmas. Conversely there has been no written correspondence or discussions held in meetings with the Government since then saying the offer has been withdrawn.

The new Shareholder Agreement incorporating the finance was agreed in principle a few weeks ago with the MOI. Since then the MOI has been orchestrating approvals from other parties necessary to complete the Government's internal protocol before signing I believe. As I understand it that process is now complete and all that remains is the final signature by the Minister.

The finance agreement has been well reported in the local thenational and the international press as well as on numerous websites on the internet. No news of the offer being rescinded has been released.

Prem have also received directions in writing on what the money has been provided for and is to be expended on. That’s been RNS’d.

Confirmation that the MOI has now been assigned the facility has also been received in writing and that too has been RNS’d

4 of 6

I would like to clarify a point. It isn't the Government that's secured a proposed investment of $6 million to invest in RHA. Therefore I can see no reason whatsoever to conclude there’s a third party that may be lending the Government the money and who may want their interest recognised in Prem as a third party. Prem have now RNS's that the MOI have now been assigned the $6m specifically for investment in RHA so I'm not sure how that could be made any clearer.

It’s common knowledge that the mine will begin to produce WO3 concentrate from its three well known sources to make up the total ROM. We know that the underground mine will take a couple of months to ramp up to its steady state of around 6kt’s/month of ore delivered to the ROM pad and we probably can also imagine ore from the pit and the material from the tailings complimenting its delivery virtually from day one. There may also be some material in dumps and temporary stockpiles too that can be utilised but the quality of material in those is largely unknown and therefore difficult to quantify.

But there’s another very likely source of WO3 production that's not well so well known that could substantially increase production. It would come from the material excavated to construct the new decline shaft. Prem has very good idea of the shape of the mineralisation on site now and it could make perfect sense to position the new shaft in the mineralised strike and deliver the material excavated to ROM pad as well.

There is a “trade off” situation as some of the ore within the strike above and below the new decline shaft will have to be sacrificed. But nevertheless from the maths I have the finances look extremely attractive to me.

5 of 6

The new decline shaft is unlikely to be a straight run for many reasons not least of all health & safety. Picture it as following the same profile as an external staircase on the outside of a tall building if it helps. It’s more than likely going to be to be zig-zag in longitudinal section with multiple turning points or "landings". That way the plan dimensions for the shaft may be no more than say 100m x 10m if that and be positioned relatively easily over the strike. In cross section the shaft will be about 4m x 2m and the total length perhaps 3km to 4km to gain access down to the 870m level and just below initially .

The total amount of material excavated to construct the shaft assuming a conversion of 4t's/cu.m in the solid I have as between 120kt's and 150kt's. So perhaps 10kt's/month excavated initially reducing to 6kt's towards the end of its 18 month construction period.

As we know the grades improve at depth so perhaps starting 0.3% WO3 at the start and closer to 0.7% WO3 at the 870m level at the end.

The construction of the new decline shaft if dealt with this way should be extremely cost effective and the economic ore arising from its construction could make a substantial contribution in the total delivered to the ROM pad whilst at the same time saving on waste. Even if the intersect between the shaft and the strike was just 50% initially it should in theory increase revenue by about $280/month initially sliding to about $600/month towards the end of it’s construction using today's APT prices.

That should put the mine into a positive cash flow position in no more than four to six weeks. Several weeks in fact before the underground mine is optimised and running in a steady state.
Here’s the substantive maths:-

Initially 6kt’s ROM x 0.3%Grade x 85% Metallurgical Recovery x 100 mtu’s x $275 APT/mtu less 32% Offtake Commission etc = $286/month Revenue

At the end 6kt’s ROM x 0.6%Grade x 85% Metallurgical Recovery x 100 mtu’s x $275 APT/mtu less 32% Offtake Commission etc = $572/month Revenue

6 of 6

Having asked the question I believe there's no impediments to prevent KME making an early start on constructing the new shaft. The design is relatively straightforward so there's no lead in time needed for that and there's no permitting required either. .

From a cash perspective Prem should begin to receive an income from RHA both as the Manager under The Management Agreement and the owner of the plant under The Rental Agreement. The income to should be triggered by the re-start and effectively stop the current Care & Maintenance cost burden that's being weighing heavy for over a year.

I’m not exactly sure how much the combined income to Prem will be from both Agreements. But I have it as around $80k/month which is from a reference I took a little while ago. Notwithstanding the final figures are pending agreement the ones I've used shouldn't be regarded as a pure guess.

The timing of any finance payments to be made by RHA against Prems loan will depend how it’s dealt with under The Loan Agreement. If the repayments are recognised as an steady cost accruing after RHA’s AISC’s then payments should start on the mine reopening and made on a regular basis say monthly. I have this as the most likely situation and payments could be around $250k to $350k/month over the next five to seven years or so.

If on the other hand in the unlikely case the loan repayments can only be paid out of net profits then clearly they're not going to start until the mine reaches that position. In this case however payments are likely to be made on an ad-hoc basis such that the mine is left in a neutral profit/loss position at the end of each of the accounting periods.

Either way Prem should anticipate an income either from regular loan repayments or made out of positive cash flow from mining operations in a few months if not sooner from the restart of operations.

I’ve made my thoughts on this and other issues known to the company. The responses I've received from them have mostly been very positive and I hope my thoughts are of interest to some of you too.

AIMHO & GLA genuine shareholders

MrMagoo31 I couldn't agree more.

Get the ZITF out of the way this week and I believe we'll see the MOI concentrating on his "material" business including RHA's SA & its financing.

It's a huge event every year but this year it's exceptional with lots of support. I imagine the MOI will be in attendance most of this week.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiV_Piq8uLhAhU1rHEKHXz4AJkQqQIILCgAMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fbulawayo24.com%2Findex-id-news-sc-national-byo-160952.html&usg=AOvVaw0ayj3N10Xq2kdOQF5J8nDV

"For the first time since the inception of the Zimbabwe International Trade Fair 60 years ago, organisers have been forced to pitch tents to accommodate more exhibitors as the available space has been taken up for this year's showcase."

GLA genuine shareholders.

Smilemore Neil's a nice name but it's not mine!

1 of 6

As things stand Prem holds 5,010,333 shares in Circum Minerals Limited ("Circum"), who in turn own 100% of the Danakil Potash Project in Ethiopia. The project has the potential to be a world class asset and one of the largest potash mines on Earth producing both Muriate of Potash (MOP) & Sulphate of Potash (SOP).

Circum has held a majority ownership in the project since 2013. It was originally owned by AgriMinco but they sold 70% of it to Circum and the balance of 30% to Prem. Circum subsequently bought out Prem in 2014. But Prem have been buying shares in Circum since then and currently own just over 5%.

The project as we all probably know is situated in the Danakil evaporite basin which is recognised as one of the hottest places on earth. An ideal climate for the mines evaporation process .

The potential resource there is nothing short of mind blowing. The licensed area covers 3500ha. So over three times the area of Paris or Manchester and about a third of the size of Cornwall. So it’s big! Ha ha.

There's an NI 43-101 compliant reserve and resource of 5 billion tonnes of potash salts at grades of over 18% KCI in place for the project. There's also a further 7 to 9 billion tonne ipotential identified reasonably accurately by a seismic survey.

2 of 6

Again just for perspective that would give the project an in ground value of nearly $1 trillion. Using the adage of valuing the project from 1% to 2% of its in ground resource we get to roughly a $10 bn Market Cap at its height. That may not be too far away if 7.5mt's to 10mt's/ annum was produced which appears to be possible.

Arguably at present Prems shares can be substantially valued at over US$10 million. The substance being the latest price at which Circum has accepted subscriptions. For perspective that on it's own is as much as Prems current Market Cap!

I believe Circum now has a new DFS for Danakil. But as far as I'm aware it's a private document that’s currently undisclosed. For now we’re only able to consider Circums latest presentation along with any information we're given by Prem. Significantly amongst other things the document will enable a bankable valuation to be made on the project and the importance of that to both Circum and Prem cannot be overstated.

There is a benchmarking exercise to do against the neighbouring Danakali potash mine in Eritrea too as a comparison . Whilst that’s interesting Danakali in Eritrea is a few years ahead of Danakil. It's much smaller too and is a j.v. project which makes quite a difference. It's reported to be one of the world’s most advanced and economically attractive SOP projects. It has a Market Cap US$902M an IRR of 29.9% and almost a 200-year LOM. There's a JORC reserve estimate of 1.1 bnt's at 10.5% K2 O.

Like it or not Circums Danakil mine at over five times in size and with far better grades will overturn all of those bold statements. A valuation using Danakali as a benchmark would put Prems investment higher than $10m. Much higher which is why you'll often hear GR say that benchmarking should be the preferred valuation method. But I personally think a valuation based on Circums last subscriptions is probably the safest and most conservative way. For now at least

3 of 6

So at the steady state production planned of 3.5mt's/ annum planned for the mine and based on the estimated total resource that would give the project a Life Of Mine of roughly 750 years which is the best part of a kiloyear or 1 Millennium to you and me. So it’s big from that perspective too.

Circum was granted its mining license two years ago and since then they seem to have been working on getting the $1bn Capex finance arranged. No doubt all aspects necessary for making a start on constructing the mine this year too not least of all selecting a suitable contractor to build the mine..

Circums plan is to ramp up production to 3.5mt's/annum in four phases in order to minimise the Capex needed and to mitigate the risk. Potash mines are renowned for needing a quite high Capex so the planned construction period for the mine of two years at first appears long is probably commensurate.

Phase 1 production target of 750kt's /annum is set 2021 leading up to a phase 4 optimised and steady state production of 3.5mt's /annum by sometime in 2024 I believe.

SOP & MOP have both cost and value differentials. Cash Costs (CC’s) or mining production costs if you prefer are said to be less than $40/t for MOP and $112/t or thereabouts for SOP. Both of those rank amongst the lowest costs in the world.

Revenues after offtake commissions is more difficult to assess but I have at about $150/t for MOP and nearer $350/t for SO

4 of 6

The SOP & MOP will be a extracted in solution from the same boreholes. They can be kept entirely separate as they are situated in well defined layers at different levels.It's quite an important point to make as it brings flexibility in the mining plan and will allow the mine to vary the output for each type potash to its advantage.
Initially I imagine the mine will produce mainly SOP which should enable it to ramp up from phase 1 to 3 out of profit rather than dilute or take on further debt.

The Capex needed to get to phase 4 is said to be $1bn. Although the figure mentioned in Prem's recent Webinar was $1.1bn. I'm not sure but I imagine the addition $100k is for contingencies which is an allowance that always features.

In the Webinar we were also told that Circum had secured the $750m debt finance it was looking for and two Brokers were negotiating the $350m balance needed to be raised in equity with eight funds.

All of that seems a while ago now so perhaps the negotiations are nearing conclusion if not already complete.

The intention is to ship the potash from the mine to the port using huge “roadtrains” via a newly built dedicated road. But even so to ship 3.5mt's /annum is going to be a big ask.The mine will be capable of producing considerably more than 3.5mt's/annum. But to do so the mine is going to need a rail link and freight train without doubt. As big as these monster road trains are a freight train is capable of carrying 40 to 50 times more at up to 6,000t's. It's a much cheaper cleaner and safer too.

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwijur_mut7hAhVDEVAKHTKHDRcQwqsBMAB6BAgHEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D0iFkKRh5kcM&usg=AOvVaw0s-jdVaz20mpYk5YiiwQ_h

5 of 6

World fertilizer prices ebb and flow on the basic law of economics of supply and demand as we all would expect. In recent history we've seen potash prices fall and they only bottomed out last year. They now continue to follow an upward trend and slow rally in line with the forecast by many experts. All of this bodes well for Danakil project. SOP prices also continue to demand a considerable premium over those for MOP and I can't see that changing.

However a noteworthy event that happened last year too but doesn't appear to be quite so well known. In or around August India being one of the largest end users entered into a huge long term offtake agreement with Belarusian Potash Company (BPC) one of the worlds largest producers. The prices agreed were at a premium to the then market prices of about 25% or $50/t for MOP.

The effect of that has been not only to lift the market prices generally but more importantly to lay a floor on future prices falling close to or below cost which is good news for Danakil. This is what Londons ICIS said at the time “The global Muriate of Potash (MOP) market is bracing for a flurry of trading and price fluctuations after Indian buyers finalised negotiations for a crucial long-term import contract at a $50/tonne increase”.

So what does all of this come down to for Prem and it’s shareholders. Well for starters it tells us that we have a 5% holding in what is looking very likely to be a world class potash mine. It’s reasonable to assume that a bankable valuation will have been made on the project using Circums DFS by now which will give support to values arrived at by the other methods. Those of you familiar with the NI 43-101 Certification that it’s mandatory for valuations to be made on the project at key milestones once it’s in production. Unfortunately for us however that document also remains undisclosed. For the time being at least.

6 of 6

The shares Prem own are not “locked- in” and a “locked-in” situation cannot be imposed on Prem by Circum without prior agreement. To do so would be unlawful and place Circum in breach of contract. If Circum wanted such a situation then it can only request it or alternately offer to by back Prems shares at a reasonable price. In terms this means that Prem is free to liquidate it’s holding in Circum in whole or in part and to sell to anyone at any time it wants. There are no impediments.

The up to date timing milestones and fundamentals of the project are given to us by Circum in it’s latest presentation issued very recently and on its website. From those it’s reasonable to assume there must be a Corporate Action of sorts in the very near future if the milestones set are to be met. For me the IPO route looks the most likely. The Government have invested in and largely completed the necessary infrastructure works. Capex debt finance has been arranged. Capex equity finance is either being resolved or in place. Permitting is granted. The teams is in place and so on.

I hope some of the thoughts I’ve shared are of interest and as always they’re AIMHO

GLA all genuine shareholders.

kelladee I envy you!

GL

1 of 8

Most genuine shareholders believe that Zulu is huge and could be good. But just how good isn't easy to visualise. Zulu's Scoping Study or EPS if you prefer to call it that prepared by BARA Consulting helps. In that we’re given some reference pointers that are extremely useful. But although the EPS lays a marker in sand it gives very little guidance on scale and therefore potential which is what investors are keen to see and are understandably very interested in.

What BARA have done is prepare a statement of fact on a fully SAMREC compliant but relatively very short length of just one of the known lithium strikes on the existing license area. That's all they're allowed to do and remitted to do. Consultants like BARA aren’t given to speculation. They have to be “mechanical” and deal with what they're asked to do. So BARA put together their excellent report and built a business model around what they considered. That's the extent of it!

But as I say BARA’s appraisal and models were based upon just 15% of one known strike which is just a small fraction of what's been identified so far on the current licensed area and Zulu’s potential. It follows therefore that BARA’s business models must be minimalist and read in that light. In just about every case mining reserves and resources increase over the LOM and mining plans change accordingly. That will apply nevermore so than in Zulu’s case.

So Prem took the EPS and from it estimated an overall resource and made their estimate known to shareholders saying it was for guidance only. But what Prems estimate does is give an indication of scale much better than the EPS in that respect. It was based upon drill results and shouldn't be considered as simply as Prems guess. It’s much more accurate and scientific than that.

2 of 8

If anything Prems estimate is more likely to be conservative than not. Latterly in the drilling campaign Prem undertook further drilling to delineate newly discovered strikes that appeared to run on to the site boundaries and beyond. I believe those findings are just drillers notes so far and are neither disclosed of included in their estimate. To get a better idea of the affect of scale here's some benchmarking and calculations of my own. If I'm near right the results are simply breathtaking!

If the licensed area stays unaltered and we take Prems highest target resource we have a resource of 160mt's @1.06% Li2O. Prem derived that from the known and measured strike used in the EPS and extrapolated it on a straightforward pro-rata basis. There were further strikes that were identified towards the end of the drilling campaign too but they weren’t counted in the estimate. The drilling was carried out purposely to delineate those strikes up to the boundaries and perhaps helped to justify Prems EPO application we see today..

So if we assume the 160mt's is about right. LCE prices are currently about $10.5k/t and the conversion factor to get from LCE to Li2O is x 2.473. So for ease of maths let's say the current Li2O price is $25k/t. That would give Zulu an “in-ground” value of 160m x 1.06% x $25k which is $42.4bn. It’s worth reiterating as I've used it later. $42.4bn!

The largest hard rock lithium resource in the world is owned by AVZ Minerals in the DRC and it’s resource there was increased to over 400mt's @1.66% Li2O last December giving it an ”in ground” value of $166bn. Some 4x higher in value than Zulu’s in estimation.

Zulu is often benchmarked against Pilbara's mine in Australia too given it's of a similar size with similar grades. But Pilbara is three years or so ahead of Zulu and is in production now. It's resource is 216mt's @ 1.13% Li2O or something like that. So it's “in ground” value is $61bn just less than 50% higher in value than Zulu.

All very interesting. As is the fact that Zulu’s Lithium is very high quality. It has a very low iron content which sets it’s above most of it’s piers in the space. For that reason it’s sure to be highly sought after come the day.

3 of 8

These mines are massive and highly profitable by any measure. Pilbara's original mining plan was to produce over 300kt’s of battery grade Spodumene from a ROM of 2mt's/annum giving the mine a LOM of over 20 years. But that's now been changed. Pilbara have doubled the ROM to 5mt's/annum and to catch the current market outlook I presume. It’s market cap from producing 300kt’s of Concentrate is $1.2bn albeit it’s All in Costs are likely to be higher than Zulu’s which bodes well and is very interesting too.

Now here's the sting in the tail. Well for other miners at least. Prems EPO application increases Zulu's mining area from 350ha currently under license to over 22,000ha. That’s 57 x bigger!

So if you imagine the resource continues at the same density across the EPO area applied for that would give Zulu an “in ground” value of over $2.4 trillion. That’s fifteen times higher in value than the largest mine of it's kind in the world and forty times higher in value than Pilbara. All of a sudden Pilbara starts to take the size of a minnow such is the potential of Zulu!

Some like to value mines based on the value “in-ground“. It’s a quick and easy way and it’s a method adopted quite often. We saw GR do it on HBR in the recent Webinar. He quoted $22/ oz Au which is 1.5% or thereabouts of the projects resource. Most that use this say between 1% & 2% is appropriate. So what GR did on HBR fits.

I'm not a fan of this valuation method to be honest. There's better ways to value Zulu. Far better. However now I've mentioned the “in ground “ values it's just worth saying that using a factor of 1.5% Zulu's Market Cap on its current area would be almost $640m which suggests a SP contribution of 4p to 5p or thereabouts to Prem. But on its larger area Prems value would be many multiples of that. But whether it would be 57 times more on it’s larger EPO area is questionable in my mind. But a SP of £2.50 or thereabouts which equates to a 3,000 bagger or $3m out of a £1k investment from here might be a slight exaggeration. Ha ha!

4 of 8

Apparently there's been two objections to Prems EPO application. One on economic grounds which I believe was rejected without much ado. The other was a "blanket" application that covered a much larger area that overlapped Prems. But it was made by someone that has no connections to Zimbabwe and never worked there.. A “try on” put simply and because of that it’s been said it too has little chance of full consideration.

As your probably aware in mining increasing the resource and/or extending the LOM has little impact on Market Caps and Share Prices in most cases. That's understandable given profitability usually remains largely unchanged. If the production level is unaltered it simply means the mine stays operational longer. So no big deal really especially when the LOM is reasonably long at its shortest. However I believe Zulu's situation couldn't be more different.

As I see it if the licence area remains unchanged we're unlikely to see Zulu plan to produce Lithium Carbonate from a chemical plant on site. Due to current site area constraints if Zulu want to produce Lithium Carbonate we may have to opt for using the shared facility in Bulawayo that’s under construction at the moment and that defeats the object to a degree.

On the other hand if the licence area increases by a reasonable margin in the current EPO it could be cost effective for Zulu to build its own dedicated chemical plant adjacent to mining operations and ship the Lithium in Carbonate form.

The difference between the appraisals of the two options is huge particularly in financial terms. One would be good but the other could be exceptional.Truly exceptional if my understanding is anywhere near right.

5 of 8

For the purposes here I'm going to wear my positive hat and assume Prems EPO application is successful at least in part and that the new enlarged area will be conducive to Carbonate production at the mine site. I'm also going to predict Lithium prices at the point of production a two years out in the case of Concentrate and four to five years out in the case of Carbonate. I’ve been conservative but based my views on increases in market demand and forecasts published by experts.

So please bear those two things in mind. As I say I’ve tried to be conservative in other areas but in my view they’re factors that shouldn't be ignored and left unconsidered

Battery grade Spodumene is currently selling through offtakers at around $900/t & $1000/t. The current market price for Lithium Carbonate Equivalent on the other hand is around $10,500/t so perhaps through offtakers $7000/t some 7 x higher than >6% Spodumene Concentrate. That’s reflected in the BARA report too. So projected off takers prices then say $2k/t for >6% Spodumene and $20k/t for LCE.

If I count the Petalite and Tantalum I'll ramble on forever and it's going to make the maths quite difficult to follow. So I've assumed they cancel each other out and ignored them. I think it's a reasonable assumption and conservative too..

I've also used Zulu’s EPS and Prospects Arcadia Mine in Zimbabwe where I can for references to make my statements and calculations more factual and less “dreamy”. There are some key non-disclosures on their offtake agreements in Prospects presentations which is a shame but understandable for confidentiality.

Prospect haven't long entered into a seven year offtake agreement with Sinomine a Chinese offtaker on a build and transfer basis. Sinomine have agreed to design and build the mine but then transfer ownership of it to Prospect in a share swap arrangement of $10m for 10% stake and an offtake agreement for 70% of the Lithium Concentrate produced for the next seven years. Prospect have a say in the mines design and take ownership of it when it's built. They pay for it’s cost then over a three year payback period I believe. It sounds a good arrangement but Sinomines payment rates under the agreement are undisclosed so I can’t be entirely sure.

6 of 8

Now here's an interesting part. Prospect have the right under the agreement to divert up to 50% of their Concentrate at any time to an owned Carbonate plant. That is step change for them given they've got the room on site. Their licensed area is 4x the current size of Zulu’s.

Arcadia’s forecasting to start production within a year from a “spade in the ground” which is very quick especially considering the climatic conditions has been met. They intended to produce 200 kt's/annum of Lithium Petalite Concentrate and over 150kt’s of Spodumene Concentrate initially and whilst those targets may have been met they’ve just opened a chemical plant and are now producing Carbonate too.

The Arcadia mine in Zimbabwe is said to be one of the largest hard rock Lithium mines in the world. At 0.2% cut off I think they have a resource of about 75mt's at similar grades to Prem. To put that into perspective Zulu has an assessed but well founded target of twice that and that's just on its current licensed area. Like all appraisals logistics must be considered. It will be the pinch point for Zulu in my view. I doubt we will be able to ship much more than 300kt's/annum of by road to Bulawayo.

So with my positive hat on I like to imagine Zulu in 3 phases. Viz:-

PHASE1 DFS - I think Zulu could command a $100m to $150m Market Cap at this stage or more subject to reasonable fundamentals which I'm confident we'll see. If there are offers from suitors at this point Zulu’s value could be more. Substantially more and I see that as a real possibility.

I've derived the basic value from Prospects deal with Sinomine where it was given a similar value in the same time & space. So if we have say Prem has10bn shares in issue then we get to a 1p share price contribution to Prem. Fairly straightforward.