Member Info for TitusScroad

Computer, I think you could do yourself and the rest of us a favour by selling up and moving on. Your posts show all the hallmarks of an emotional retail investor. If you don’t have the risk appetite to be invested in a junior mining stock, which by its very nature is highly speculative, then you need to move on.

Your points have been addressed numerous times and you keep regurgitating the same old FUD. The BoD CANNOT mention names. They CANNOT update on what’s going on in the data room other than the general information they’ve been able to give. If they mentioned any household name they would be instantly in a legal hole that could see them prosecuted for attempted market manipulation.

You say that shareholders are getting board (sic) but I’m sitting very comfortably and topping up whilst there’s chance. You’re the one that sounds bored and you want an instant pump every time some news comes out. Did you buy at the top by any chance?

As for the research note, it was 46 pages long and the Blencowe team will have only just got eyes on it so they’ll likely be digesting it and trying to pick out the highlights before communicating anything about it. That, and it’s aimed at institutional investors so is less important to put out anything to appease retail. Finally, I’d prefer them to be progressing funding talks than posting on twatter.

Do us and yourself a favour and think before you spam a load of posts on here in the future please, and remember, all the same complaints you keep trotting out have been addressed multiple times on here by multiple users. I’m not even going to get involved with your warrant rants…

You’re obsessed with Mike being a poor communicator (he isn’t) and struggles to secure funding based purely on your own sentiment rather than looking at the information available objectively.

It is entirely possible that Cavendish are simply using 100% equity at 8p as the easiest way to model their report for funding purposes aren’t you?

‘Pending actual developments’ means they are using the most dilutive solution and that they don’t have visibility on the actual funding model. Which means they’re still setting a target price of 47.9p factoring in 100% dilution…

‘In practice, any such

funding is likely to be raised in tranches as required. The assumed share price is adopted purely for modelling convenience – we expect the achievement of further derisking milestones to support equity

issuance at meaningfully higher share price levels than that assumed here. Sensitivity analysis indicates that our valuation is relatively insensitive to reasonable variations in assumed equity dilution’

This suggests that the sp for equity raises may be higher than the current sp?

I was just reading that as well and it had me scratching my head a bit. Would the ‘pending…’ caveat mean their assumption is that a share issuance will occur to cover construction *unless* project level equity is finalised as an alternative. Ie, they believe that funding of P1 will occur one way or the other but their current assumption is that it will be a share issuance?

Secondly, they assume 8p but with a strategic partner could they potentially issue fewer shares at a higher SP? I don’t know why a strategic partner would accept that with the current sp but my assumption would be that the long term potential would be attractive enough for them to do so?

From the ‘updated production pathway’ of the updated DFS:

P1: delivers up to 20,000tpa of 97% TGC concentrate at Orom-Cross plus up to 3,000tpa spheronised graphite from in-country beneficiation at a proposed facility near to Gulu.

Didn’t the updated DFS include some production at Gulu as part of P1?

Just over 14m shares issued from the January offering of a possible 64m.

As has been stated to you several times already, Computer, and you still don’t seem to have got it… management can’t come out and tell investors what is going on with progress because he’d be castrated by his legal team for doing so. They’ve stated all they can without breaching any regulations, several parties are under NDA in the data rooms and that’s as far as information can go. If you don’t believe that there’s several interested parties and that they’ll get one across the line for funding then perhaps it’s time to sell up and move on because I don’t see any reason for you to stay invested if you no longer trust the process.

There is risk it doesn’t get funded but it’s closer to funding now than it has ever been , you either have the risk appetite to stay the course or you go and invest in something safer.

Theoretically but that would be an insane market cap. If it matched the market cap of GMET it would be around 75p though, which would be very nice.

Just to confirm, Oak Securities has released a new research note with a PT of 35.7p that supersedes the previous target of 33.7p? Can you share a link if so please as I’ve searched and can only see the January news regarding the 33.7p PT. Thanks

Nice looking cup and handle possibly forming on the 1d charts

Have you even read the DFS

1. Phase 1 Production (P1) - US$45m (project-level focus):

· Primary focus is securing P1 equity funding, with a preference for project-level funding to minimise dilution at the plc level.

· The Company notes that several interested P1 investment partners have signed NDAs and are conducting due diligence in the data room as part of their internal financial decision-making processes.

Obviously this could mean share dilution as project level equity is their preference which doesn’t necessarily translate to what will happen. But with several interested parties having signed NDAs being involved why would they not be using that leverage to try and ensure P1 non-dilutive funding? Funding doesn’t just magically happen and even with the low CAPEX for P1 it’s not just as straightforward as someone throwing money at it speculatively. Any prospective partner is going to take their time to weigh up that sort of investment. $45m is not a small number and, unlike most emotional retail investors who will throw money at something without doing any DD and then panic when they don’t see massive immediate returns, these people actually have to make sure they’re not throwing their money down a drain.

I may be wrong but they’ve always stated ‘project equity’ funding for P1 is their preference? Debt was always preferred for P2 to scale up. And project equity ≠ equity in BRES. There could of course be dilution but that’s not the preferred option and still isn’t reading the DFS today

Just a typical ‘sell the news’ cycle for the markets

The thing to remember is that IRR is just one metric by which institutions will measure the project. The cost of energy/oil will likely have had an impact and they’ll maybe have also had a reality check when dealing with funding partners that 96% was probably always a bit optimistic.

However, all the other metrics have increased materially and things like free cash flow, EBITDA and the unchanged CAPEX are equally, if not more important. IRR is still very very good.

One thing I’d have liked to see would have been an increase in P2 production numbers but that will come after P1 funding I would guess.

Today may see some retail jitters as the IRR reduction may spook some people. However, institutions are probably going to like what they see. A lot.

EBITDA and free cash flow also increased materially. IRR is important but probably reflects increased OPEX, especially regarding things like cost of fuel

Fantastic, thanks for confirming. In which case, bring on the DFS update tomorrow.

Is this confirmed as being Charles’ actual Telegram account please?