Member Info for WorldWidePleb

Thanks for the link jaguar flush, great info.

Not for an exportable product in Zim Jaglith. Check what's required and post it here.

You didn't give a timeline for the sorter fitting, commissioning and optimisation either.

Incorrect again Jaglith. You’re highlighting your lack of knowledge or inability to read/comprehend.

GR and Stark confirmed the grades. The sorters were fitted once the remedial action was underway - what was the time frame for the sorters?

After fitting, commissioning and optimisation, they could have sorted ore but not grind it to feed size until after the mill was finished. Hence, non-saleable for export in Zim.

Back to your pie.

Jaglith,

That’s experimental tech you don't understand. Don't project.

The sorting is actually now tried and tested—incredible stuff. It will be noted in hindsight.

If you feel strongly about it, I recommend passing up on your next pie and doubling down on you short.

Jaglith,

I also usually don't reply—risible commentary, etc.

But this is a perfect public example of people not knowing what they’re doing.

The fact you can't answer that, as you couldn't the last simple question that I presented to you makes me understand why your not worried about your short and that's it’s of a trivial size.

Did you bet this week's fish and chip money?

Tygra,

What an unexpected emotional outburst!

I only present the facts and much knowledge in this area to assist your understanding.

I thought you would be elated to have your misinformed opinion corrected?

You can surely now understand now why you didn't get what you churlishly demanded?

May I suggest you ring Prems Legals, explain to them who you are, correct them and their decades of industry legal knowledge (along with the NOMAD) and then continue on your merry way.

Please give us an update on how it goes.

And there ends the first lesson on point 1.

Ok, Tygra now onto point 2.

You start.

Incorrect Tygra. If you think you know more than Prems Legal and NOMAD, ring them.

A warning: You’ll look just as foolish as you do now.

Do some research before posting uneducated drivel .

Good piece from Bloomberg:

Look at the secondy bidder. A lot of competition to secure lithium resources at present.

Have a look at the M&A action in Aus also.

No one answered my Kod read across question yet. It's worth while. Or the Arcadia average.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-01/china-to-invest-2-8-billion-in-zimbabwe-in-lithium-energy

Know what you hold. Look out for snakes.

1. "You can't pay debt by continually diluting due to failure."

Tygra, Your statement contains a false assumption - Dilution to failure.

Let me correct it for Prems situation,

Prem has -if needed- ample equity to do precisely that (Shareholder approval would be needed to do it in one swipe. An AGM would be called).

It also has book value in the RHA plant to pay down the pre-payment if needed by a substantial amount.

To summarize, that is a loaded statement concerning prems operations and, in that continuation, also false.

But there's no need to worry about that; Prem now produces highly valuable product be it SC3,4,5 or 6 . In qty. Those payment amounts are now nothing to worry about.

2."You stick to your bizarre contract interpretation, I'll stick to the FACRS as they are laid down in the revised agreement. "

No Tygra,

I stick to the facts and what is know to the public domain.

It seems you only use 'FACRS'. I'm starting to understand.

"It has to start 'no later than' today, we haven't been informed via RNS that SC6 is being produced therefore the market now has to guess whether we've honoured the contract or not."

A: I cleared this up for you in the prior post. Go over it, do a little research, sleep on it, have a long walk to ponder, ask a friend and you should start to understand.

3."If SC6 'is' being produced, that's material market sensitive information and 'should' be put out immediately via RNS. The fact there is no RNS 'suggests' to me that we haven't produced adequate grades yet."

You have been told in an RNS and public communications that the plant is capable and will produce SC6. Therefore, for the same reason as above, this statement is incorrect—lack of market regulation understanding.

4."Enjoy your new thread, what's the price of the shares again?

Yeah, thought so."

A: Currently .47p

This statement suggests the share price does not apply to you, and hence you're not invested. Strange?

Ok, I'm sure you're happy that cleared up; we have plenty to get through.

Next.

Tygra, I think one of the pertinent points of misunderstanding today is this:

4. “Seeing as though the revised agreement is now in force, GR 'should' have released an RNS with the current production volumes and grades.”

Incorrect: The keyword is ‘commence’

As the whole statement is out in the public domain, one would only have to RNS if they hadn't started production by that date. The only RNS that has to be issued is completion. I’m sure Prems legal team agree - Hence, there is no RNS today telling us otherwise.

To keep the bulletin board clear for more experienced and knowledgeable users/readers, I've created a new thread heading for Tygra and myself so you can filter the lessons out. Tygra -I hope you don't mind- I'm sure you understand.

asher7; you would think they would be happy to know their worries were based on incorrect assumptions. I sense a lot of anger and emotion. Stange position to take. Very little cohesive thought or data.

Ok Tygra,

Thanks for replying,

Your (Now) current position: “PREM have RAISED funds by diluting shareholders“

-Past tense

Original position: “Failure to provide SC6 means we have to massively dilute shareholders to pay them cash instead.”

-Future tense

Okay, so you’ve changed your original statement now from a future event to the past. I take that as conceding the point. You were incorrect.

The rest of your position regarding 'business' and payments is just a complete word salad, unfortunately.

Prem has on account £1.5m of contingency cash for a missed deadline. It will be used to pay down the Canmax pre-payment. Think of it as paying down a loan (It's not a loan, but for simplicity, so you can understand).

You have a £30m loan and £1.5m cash. Your current equity is £-28.5m.

You pay down the loan by £1.5m.

You now have a £28.5m loan and £0m cash. Your current equity is £-28.5m.

Prem, of course, has a lot more cash than that. But to explain the point.

Ok, that's the first point and an additional clearing up of your understanding of net equity.

We have lots to get through here. Next point.

Tygra incorrect again.

Let's do this one at a time, there’s far to much waffle and misinformation. A gish gallop is the common term- look it up.

You’ll feel more comfortable with your investment for clearing this it up. Thank me for my time later.

So,

Number 1.

“Nonsense, if we fail to provide Canmax with 1k tonnes of SC6 we have to GIVE them $1.5 million this month. It may very well be in PREM's account from the raise(s) but it won't be when it's handed over to Canmax. It doesn't 'come off a pre-payment' because without supplying the company who give us the money in the first place with SC6, how can PREM 'give' them $1.5 million when PREM does NOT make any money? “

A. “It may very well be in PREM's account from the raise(s)”: Good to see you starting to accept you were wrong.

“It doesn't 'come off a pre-payment“

Right there, you’re wrong again.

It comes off the Canmax prepayment. £1.5m out from prem. £1.5m off the Canmax pre-payment. Net-net zero.

Discuss.

Precisely Ezhik.

Kodal is finding value again after solving it's issue.

Shows how fast the sentiment and valuation changes.

What's the read-through now for Prem's pre-production 20Mt resource valuation?

Tygra,

Great piece, but there are a few minor inaccuracies.

1. “Lesser grades can be sold to 'lesser' companies, but we don't have open contracts and free exports, we have a legally binding contract to supply Canmax”

Do you have the entire contract, or are you making assumptions regarding grades and, contingent market sales, etc?

SC5 trades at a 10% discount to SC6 at present. So, it is significant.

Canmax takes SC5 and below grades.

So, SC5 would be marketable. As far as Canmax are concerned, it all goes into the same plant.

2. “Failure to provide SC6 means we have to massively dilute shareholders to pay them cash instead.”

Incorrect - As you know. £1.5m has been accounted for in the share raise. It comes off Prem's prepayment, so a Net-Net zero for Prem.

There's also the option to take shares. £1.5m is just over 1%. Hardly massive.

3. “There's no way GR is getting $1.5 million from other buyers who would be happy to take whatever is being produced.”

Are you assuming Canmax wouldn't take it? If they won't, there will be a clause in the contract which makes it marketable elsewhere. Standard practise.

4. “Seeing as though the revised agreement is now in force, GR 'should' have released an RNS with the current production volumes and grades.”

Incorrect: The keyword is ‘commence’

As the whole statement is out in the public domain, one would only have to RNS if they hadn't started production by that date. The only RNS that has to be issued is completion. I’m sure Prems legal team agree - Hence, there is no RNS today telling us otherwise.

5. “Stark told us the plant was working as expected but they couldn't tell us the grades during an interview. The best part of an entire month has passed since that interview and we've heard nothing from GR.”

Incorrect: GR did an interview 11 days ago… it can be found here -https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BdyMCmZjhEw&pp=ygUSSWcgcHJlbWllciBhZnJpY2Fu

6. “There's no reason at all for GR not to release a 'ZULU Lithium Update' today”

There’s no reason for GR to release one either.

A few ‘minor’ points. Don't want anyone to mistake you for a sbake in the grass.

Other than that a good rant. Keep it up.

And that's down unfortunately. This has turned into a lifestyle company for the board.

The current business plan is to acquire loss-making dross that other companies are offloading.

Apologise Martinigirl, you misunderstand me. I don't respond to your posts as they are so risible.

Are they meant to be responded to?

That was a wordy ‘defense’ of merely an observation?

You two must be close. You post exactly the same guff, on only the same two companies, one of which you both proport not being invested in.

You both parrot exactly the same infantile twitter account, in the same manner, same grammar, same emotional patterns, at the same time.

Small world 🤡

No answer from Raaydaar about the ‘X’ account @radarman. Strange. Not typically so quiet. But Martinigirl is here.

https://x.com/orbiradarman?s=21&t=x7jSf4uKpkEb1QjiK7BngA

Apart from the account having the exact phrasing as Raydaar and someone else… the account cheerleads ALGW—a little known company.

Check the ALGW BB… Lo and behold, there’s Martinigirl. What are the chances?

Flotation units are tried and tested tech.

The first industrial flotation unit was built in 1897 by the Elmore brothers.

Look up the OEM for Prem's unit. Very good name in the industry.

Too much sudden promotion. It reeks of no progress and share raise pumping desperation.

There was no news for a long time, followed by a farm-down deal to get cash for ongoing costs - The deal wasn’t ratified on time.

All of a sudden, back-to-back promotions, presentations, and, on cue, directors skipping their Greggs sausage roll that day and buying shares instead.

Director buys have to be in context and in meaningful amounts, both at present red flags.

Why? Too small amounts to be serious; if something were about to happen, you would see meaningful buys. It’s a fraction of their compensation. And more importantly…

You can’t buy shares with insider information. Therefore, I presume all deals have fallen through.

With certainty, nothing is being discussed with relevant parties at present.

If they were in negations, they wouldn’t be in an open period and hence be able to buy shares…not a good sign.