Member Info for tedoby

Strongman & Snowking just FWIW my thoughts are that Zulu is much bigger than mant of us can get our head around and with a little luck it's about to get bigger still.

So for me it isn't just about money. If anthing it about having the right skill set. Si I think MauCo will need a new BOD and team to effect what what we have.

I've posted details before but I think at around $75m CAPEX MauCo could be producing 200t's of over 6% Li2O concentrate. That would give MauCo roughly a $1 5bn Market Cap inside two years out of a $200m revenue at current offtake rates. Even on a 50/50 j.v. basis that would give Prem a contribution to M.C of $750m or £580m!

But from there I hope we see plans to build a carbonate plant on the mine site to produce the Lithium in that form without having to ship it to a shared facility in Bulawayo.

But importantly we're going to need the right team to do it I feel.

marineville

Strongman is absolutely correct!

But just to add the mines ROM design rate is 40,000t's p.m. so when running at 6,000t's last December it was operating at just 15% capacity and not the 100% as your post implies.

GLA

Great posts guys.

I'm totally aligned!

GLA

steward1 I think he could well do!

So flabbergasted you could well be I'm afraid! Ha ha.

Nice post Strongman.

From what you say I'm under the impression your're as close to what's going on as you can be without breaking any rules .

With a sizeable holding I try to do the same and my thoughts haven't changed.

Good luck!

Thanks steward1.

I can see the RNS has created uncertainty but reading the concerns I feel some or it's unfounded.

For me the Bara report puts a high certainty on the viability of the mine. There's more drilling to do yet as the rig progresses Easterly towards the shaft. If the results confirm current thinking then there will be an opportunity to extract from this location in the pit too without delay.

So as I see it the mining plan has at least 3 stages and as exploration continues they appear to becoming increasingly clear and certain.

Stage 1 is as depicted in the RNS i.e 6,000t's of ore per month with some tailings added delivered to the ROM pad etc etc to produce an annual profit of around $800 at an APT price of $300/mtu.

This should be seen as a validation exercise by a qualified independent expert that validates RHA as a viable mine. It should not be seen as RHA's Mining Plan neither should it be seen as a valuation of RHA in my view. It merely confirms that the mine should be brought back into operation. The Mining Plan needs to be developed around it but not finalised as the exploration is incomplete.

Stage 2 is subject to further drilling but is looking quite likely to include extraction from the pit with the wall and floor being redefined in an Easterly direction as higher grade blocks are located all without compromising the underground shaft. I'm guessing but that could add a further 10,000 to 20,000 t's of ore per month at say 0.25% grade delivered to the ROM pad with little or no additional CAPEX required.

If that's correct and it appears from data and insitu inspection it is then it will completely transform the economics. Revenue could increase two or three fold.

Stage 3 further development of the underground workings with new higher grades extracted from new stopes at depth with mechanised extraction via a new inclined shaft. As and if the price of APT improves in line with many analysts thinking they this option will become increasingly attractive. Again my guess is the output from the pit would increase to give RHA it's designed ROM of 40,000t's per month. The additional CAPEX needed has yet to be assessed as far as I know but i could be wrong

Bara and any potential equity partner will know all of this. But the added attraction for potential partner is of course Zulu and they're sure to be looking at the bigger picture I'm sure.

Just my views

steward1 he told us about the meeting in the Webinar.

I was the one that asked if the LOI's were strong enough to reach a final agreement with an equity partner. GR said "no not really" implying the partner would want to se a new Shareholder Agreement conrming RHA's 90% ownership before buying in. I can understand that.

The LOI's were RNS'd and confirmed the Government's approval so as I see it we need the new SA crystallising it all signing off by the Minister.

Sorry - meant to say ROM 40,000t's p.m not p.a. It's my age!

I just want to say GR's meeting/s with key Ministers in Government next week isn't more "same old, same old" with no progress having been made.

At the time when GR made the threat last time to close the mine a shareholder ownership hadn't be agreed and negations on that front needed to be brought to a head.

Letters of Intent have now been echanged confirming agreement has been reached so whilst the threat rmains the same the agreement sought is very different. What GR is now looking for is to have the shareholder ownership that's been agreed in principle enshrined is an all new Shareholder Agreement.

The two parts to the negotiations are entirely different and with the first part being agreed it's more about timing. GR needs it all crystallising to move negotiations with a potential equity partner forward.

All these calls on here to have him replaced before he's had an opportunity to conclude the ownership on RHA serve no purpose other than if anything they may in fact weaken his position in the impending negotiations.

Hopefully it won't be the mountain some think.

John with due respect what your saying there isn't quite right. It's too simplistic in my view.

The mine has a designed ROM rate of 40.000 tonnes p.a. What affects the efficiency primarily is a combination of ROM rate and the grades.

Costs and revenue will determine the mines profitability and because some All In Costs (AIC's) are linked to the ROM and some that are generally fixed and are entirely separate from it they have a sliding scale when expressed in unit terms of mtu's APT. By way of example at say 30,000 mtu's APT p.a. if AIC's are say $200/mtu then at maximum efficiency of say 175,000 mtu's APT p.a. AIC's may only be $90/mtu .

The price of APT that your referring to can only determine revenue and cannot by itself determine profitability.
Profitability can only come from revenue less AIC's and AIC's will be always be derived from a mix of fixed and variable costs which are influenced by efficiency.

They all interact together on a scale that's complicated and Bara will have had software to help put cost and value scenario into perspective.

This isn't just me saying this. The report is saying that at very low efficiency of 6,000t's of ore from the underground mine combined with a small quantity of tailings delivered to the ROM pad the mine is capable of being 10% profitable at an APT price of $300/ mtu. But at that rate the mine will only be operating at around 20% efficiency and have far greater potential.

GLA

I can smell an offer from Circum to buyout PREM here.

Softening up shareholders to accept the first offer! Seen it before. Circum may have the cash now.

First offer £30m? Zulu on its own is worth may times that and they know it. PREM is a prime target!

Good luck and watch this space!

Thom_1987 What your saying is widely misunderstood. Your're not alone. Insolvency and ability to raise finance are entirely different.

What you alluding to as being a big problem isn't in fact a problem at all. Please don't take my word for it DYOR

Molgen

Your referring now to the ability to raise finance which has nothing to do with a companies failure and ability to trade.
The bank and some accountants sometimes call it an "acid test". It's irrelevant in PREMS case as we can see because it's considering shared equity as a means.


I do hope you haven't sold your stock on your misconception. Oh dear.

£25m not 425m ***

Moljen you're using the wrong measuring stick and it's you that's wrong I'm afraid.

There are two main tests. In the one your referring to overall liabilities should be compared to overall assets. If you do the maths don't forget to add PREMS loan accounts too. $3,3m liabilities vs $60m assets? I'm only guessing but the loan accounts are worth 425m+ Circum $7m Zulu $15m RHA $10m + the rest.

The second test is PREMS ability to pay it's debts on time and clearly that's unlikely to ever be an issue given it's liquidity and SC headroom.

"Should I go on...."

You just did!

Thanks Microtan. You did well to catch all that.

Exposed!

CF73 Are you a member of the group or is there anyway I can get in touch?

Couldn't agree more Snowking!

As you imply why settle for an annual PBT of £6m at RHA when for a relatively small investment you could treble it!

GLA

CF73 "If a Zulu deal does land soon, it will catch a lot of folk out."

Not the one that bought 51m shares yesterday though.

That wasn't a punt!!

GLA