Risk warning: The value of investments and derived income can fall. Investors may get back less than they invested.

Horizonte Minerals plc – Araguaia Nickel Project Feasibility study

FILING OF NI 43-101 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE ARAGUAIA NICKEL PROJECT INCLUDING OPPORTUNITY FOR A STAGE 2 EXPANSION TO DOUBLE NICKEL PRODUCTION

Horizonte Minerals Plc, (AIM/TSX: HZM) (‘Horizonte’ or ‘the Company’) the nickel development company focused in Brazil, is pleased to announce that it has filed the Feasibility Study (‘FS’ or the ‘Study’) for the Araguaia Ferronickel Project (‘Araguaia’, or ‘the Project’) in Brazil’s Pará State on SEDAR.  The Study has been prepared in accordance with the National Instrument 43-101 – standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’) and was previously announced on the 29th October 2018.

The Study confirms Araguaia as a Tier 1 project with a large high-grade scalable resource, a long mine life and a low-cost source of ferronickel for the stainless-steel industry. The Stage 1 FS design allows for future construction of a second Rotary Kiln Electric Furnace (‘RKEF’) process line (‘Stage 2 expansion’ or ‘Stage 2’), with potential to double Araguaia’s production capacity from 14,500 tonnes per annum (‘t/a’) nickel up to 29,000 t/a nickel. The results of this Stage 2 expansion study are included as an opportunity in Section 25 of the NI 43-101 Technical Report with the economics highlighted below.

Stage 1 – FS Highlights:

·     Initial 28-year mine life generates cash flows after taxation of US$1.6 billion with sufficient mineral resources to extend beyond 28 years;

·     Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[1] (‘NPV’) of US$401 million[2] and Internal Rate of Return (‘IRR’) of 20.1% using the base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000 per tonne3 (‘/t’);

·     Upon development, the Project is expected to produce an average of 14,500 tonnes of nickel contained within approximately 52,000 tonnes ferronickel per annum, utilising the proven RKEF technology currently used at over 40 mines around the world;

·     The base case FS economics assume a flat nickel price of US$14,000/t for the entire 28-year mine life based on Wood Mackenzie’s short-term forecast;

·     C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to year 10 of US$3.08 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$6,794/t), making Araguaia a low-cost producer;

·     Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the post-tax NPV increases to US$740 million with an IRR of 28.1%, reflecting the significant leverage that the Project returns have to any future increase in nickel prices; and

·     Capital cost estimate of US$443 million (AACE class 3), including US$65.3 million of contingencies equating to 17.2% of total capex budget.

Stage 2 – Second Line Expansion Highlights:

A key part of the FS Stage 1 Project design was that the RKEF plant and associated infrastructure was designed to accommodate the addition of a second RKEF process line (Stage 2 expansion), with potential to double Araguaia’s production capacity from 14,500 t/a nickel up to 29,000 t/a nickel. The Project Mineral Resource inventory has the grade and scale to support the increase in plant throughput from 900 kt/pa (Stage 1) to the Stage 2 rate of 1.8 Mt/a supporting the twin line RKEF flow sheet. The Stage 2 expansion assumes operating at Stage 1 production rate of 900 kt/pa for three years, after which free cash flows would be reinvested to expand the plant to 1.8 Mt/pa by the addition of a second line. All figures below represent this combined production of stage 1 for 3 years followed by the enlarged production for the remainder of the Life of Mine. 

·     The Stage 2 expansion, assumed in year 3, supports a 26-year mine life generating cash flows after taxation of US$2.6 billion;

·     No increase in upfront capital cost which remains at the same level at the FS Stage 1 of US$443 million, the Stage 2 expansion is financed through operational cash flow;

·     Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[3] (‘NPV’) of US$741 million[4] and Internal Rate of Return (‘IRR’) of 23.8% using the base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000/t[5];

·     Using a nickel price of US$11,000/t generates cash flows after taxation and payback of capital of US$1.0 billion;

·     Nickel grade of 1.82% for the first 10 years of the Stage 2 operation;

·     Annual nickel production of 29,000 t/a;

·     C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to Year 10 of US$3.00 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$6,613/t), making Araguaia a low-cost producer. Life of mine C1 cash cost of US$3.51 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$7,737/t); and

·     Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the post-tax NPV8 for the Stage 2 option increases to US$1,264 million with an IRR of 31.8%.

Horizonte CEO, Jeremy Martin, commented;

“Following on from the successful completion of the Feasibility Study for the Araguaia ferronickel project, we are very pleased to file the 43-101 Feasibility Technical Report which includes as an opportunity the Stage 2 expansion to add a second RKEF line to the Project. The Stage 2 expansion would potentially increase annual nickel production from 14,500 tonnes per annum to 29,000 tonnes per annum whilst demonstrating economies of scale for both operating and capital costs.  For this scenario the upfront pre-production capital cost remains unchanged at US$443 million and the incremental capital expenditure to build the stage 2 expansion, is anticipated to be financed out of operational free cash flow. The FS design of the RKEF plant and all associated infrastructure was configured to allow a second RKEF line to be added at a future time, as such the Stage 2 expansion benefits from the existing utilities and infrastructure expenditure. Significant items such as the powerline, water pipeline, overall process plant site, utilities, and slag storage facility already have sufficient capacity built in during the Stage 1 planning to meet the desired production increase.

The economics of the Stage 2 expansion in year 3 are compelling with the Base Case NPV8 of US$741 million and IRR of 23.8%, increasing to an IRR of 31.8% when applying consensus nickel price assuming no change in the upfront capital investment for the Stage 1 single line RKEF plant as shown in the FS.  If we apply a nickel price of US$11,000 per tonne nickel, the enlarged twin line plant generates cash flows after taxation and pay back of capital of US$1.0 billion.

We have always maintained that Araguaia has a high grade scalable mineral resource with only a small part utilised for the single line plant.  As demonstrated in the Stage 2 expansion the resource can comfortably support the increased capacity for over 26 years with the first 10 years averaging 1.82% nickel which places Araguaia on the upper range of the global grade curve even with the increased mining rate. 

The recent weakness in nickel prices appears to be reflection of macroeconomics and does not appear to have impacted wider consensus of the positive future potential of the nickel market. Demand versus supply deficits remain forecast for the short term. Inventories on the LME continue to fall with significant new supply required for the stainless-steel market which is growing at 5%[6] year on year, with new demand driven from the EV battery sector. Araguaia is anticipated to come online in 2021 and be placed in the lower quartile[7] on the laterite C1 cost curve (year 1 to year 10 of US$3.08 per pound of nickel (US$6,794/t)[8] making it one of the lower cost new nickel projects. Meanwhile the forward C1 cost curve is expected to consistently rise due to the rising costs of inputs as well as the reducing global grade profile across existing mines.

The successful completion of the Feasibility Study and the positive economics from the Stage 2 expansion all confirm that Araguaia is a tier 1 asset demonstrating flexibility and scalability with compelling economics.

The Company is well funded as we work to advance Araguaia to the construction stage and start to advance our second 100% owned Vermelho Nickel Cobalt project as part of the company’s strategy to become a leading nickel development Company. I look forward to updating the market on progress as we move into 2019.”

The FS plant ore feed rate of 900kt/a is based on a single line RKEF plant (Stage 1). This size plant represents the optimal capacity for an achievable capital cost for project financing for a single project junior development company. However, the Stage 1 plant capacity underutilises the significant Mineral Resource that HZM has within the project area (~119Mt Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at 1.27% Ni).  In the FS, the cut-off grade is 1.4% Ni and represents a “high-grade” option. The marginal cut-off grade for the Project is closer to 1.0% Ni. This means that there is a significant quantity of potentially economic material that is not mined or processed in the current Stage 1 FS schedule. Accordingly, the opportunity contemplated here is that the Stage 1 production scenario (the FS Base Case) is built and produces at an initial production level 14,500 t/a of Nickel, and that the Stage 2, expansion in year 3 is implemented as the project starts generating cash flows, thereby increasing total production to 29,000 t/a Nickel.

To explore the potential value of increasing the production rate at Araguaia, a Stage 2 expansion to 1,800kt/a plant feed in Year 3 was contemplated at a scoping level. In this Stage 2 scenario, Snowden completed pit optimisations based on the FS costs and modifying factors. The pit optimisations targeted any material determined to be economic, rather than the elevated Ni cut-off grade applied in the FS. Only Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources were considered in this scenario. Overall, the target was to achieve a similar mine life to the FS schedule (~28 years). This was achieved by selecting a revenue factor pit shell equivalent to a nickel price of US$11,200/t Ni which yields 44.0Mt of ore feed.

The Stage 1 FS plant layout was designed to allow for the future construction of a second RKEF line.  A significant portion of the Stage 1 RKEF plant and associated infrastructure has sufficient capacity to support the Stage 2 expansion, resulting in substantially lower capital costs to implement the second RKEF line. The Stage 1 equipment and infrastructure that does not require upgrading for Stage 2 includes;

·     The main power line to the plant;

·     The principle road and bridge infrastructure in-bound and outbound to the mine site;

·     Overall plant site layout, plant road / offices / stores / workshops;

·     Refinery facility;

·     The slag storage facility; and

·     Water abstraction pipeline.

As part of the preparation of the Stage 2 expansion, HZM has completed a scoping level estimate of the costs associated with implementing a second RKEF line after Year 3 of the mine life using the FS capex as a basis and locating the additional equipment in the areas within the existing FS plant layout. A summary of the estimated direct equipment costs along with associated civil works and installation costs for the Stage 2 expansion are shown in Table 1.

Table 1  Stage 1 and Stage 2 capex

WBS

Area

Stage 1 FS Pre- production Capex

(US$ million)

Stage 2 – Second RKEF line Pre- production Capex

 (US$ million)

Equipment Additions for

Stage 2

1000

Mine

6.0

NA

3000

Ore Preparation

39.0

25.2

Dryer

4000

Pyrometallurgy

137.5

109.2

Kiln, Furnace

5000

Material Supply

21.4

8.6

Coal pulverisation

6000

Utilities and Infrastructure

106.9

18.5

Substation, water pumping, cooling dam lift, water cooling pipe

7000

Buildings

9.1

0.6

Admin, change house, canteen

8000

Indirect Costs

82.4

22.0

EPCM, Owners, Construction Camp, engineering

Contingency

41.0

15.6

Contingency

Total capex

443.1

199.7

The additional costs for the Stage 2 – Second RKEF line shown in Table 1 above, represent sustaining capital expenditure which would be financed once the Stage 1 operation is cash flow positive. Therefore, the pre-production capital costs would remain the same as the FS at US$443.1 million.

Key additional items required within the plant area for Phase 2 are included in Table 1; ore preparation dryer, kiln and furnace. Items outside of the plant area include additional pumping capacity for the water abstraction pipeline, a second plant cooling water pipeline and an increase in the cooling water dam capacity.

The operating costs after the Stage 2 RKEF line becomes fully operational were estimated based on the FS operating cost estimate.  A comparison of the physicals and the economics of the FS and the expansion opportunity are shown Table 2 below.

Table 2 Comparison of physicals and financial KPI’s for the FS case and the Stage 2 Expansion[9]

Item

 

 

Unit

FS Stage 1

Stage 2 – Second Line RKEF Expansion

Base Case (US$14,00/t Ni)

Consensus case (US$16,800/t Ni)

Base Case

 (US$ 14,000/t Ni)

 Consensus case (US$16,800/t Ni)

Physicals

LOM plant feed[10]

Mt

27.3

27.3

44.1

44.1

Process rate

kt/a

900

900

1,800[11]

1,80011

Year 1- 10 Ni grade

%

1.91

1.91

1.82

1.82

LOM Ni grade

%

1.69

1.69

1.53

1.53

LOM Nickel production

kt

426

426

624

624

Strip ratio

w:o

2.1

2.1

1.9

1.9

Mine life

years

28[12]

2812

26[13]

2613

Economics

Pre-production Capital

US$ M

443

443

443

443

LOM Sustaining Capital cost

US$ M

143

143

396

396

Capital Intensity – Initial capex/t Nickel

US$/t Ni

1,041

1,041

710

710

C1 Cost (Brook Hunt)

US$/t Ni

8,193

8,193

7,737

7,737

C1 Cost (Brook Hunt) Years 1- 10

US$/t Ni

6,794

6,794

6,613

6,613

Breakeven (NPV8) Ni price

US$/t

10,766

10,766

10,105

10,105

Total Revenue

US$ M

5,970

7,164

8,742

10,490

Total cost

US$ M

3,811

3,995

5,351

5,617

Operating cash flow

US$ M

2,159

3,169

3,391

4,876

Net cash flow

US$ M

1,572

2,582

2,552

4,033

NPV8

US$ M

401

740

741

1,264

IRR

%

20.1

28.1

23.8

31.8

 

Report Filing                                                                                                                                                     

A technical report on this FS, prepared in accordance with the NI 43-101 reporting requirements, has been filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and at www.horizonteminerals.com

 

Qualified Persons          

Mr Frank Blanchfield, B.Eng, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant, Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;

Mr Andrew Ross, BSc (Hons), MSc, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant, Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;

Mr Francis Roger Billington, BSc (Hons), P.Geo. (APGO), Consultant;

Dr Nicholas Barcza, BSc (Eng.), MSc (Eng.), PhD, Pr.Eng. (ECSA), HLFSAIMM, Metallurgical Engineering Consultant;

Mr. David Haughton, B. Sc, MIMM, C Eng, Senior Process Engineer on behalf of Canadian Engineering Associates Ltd; and

Mr Robin Kalanchey, BASc.(Metals and Materials Engineering), P.Eng., Director, Minerals and Metals Western Canada, Ausenco Engineering Canada Inc (Ausenco);

are the Qualified Persons under NI 43-101, and have reviewed, approved and verified the technical content of this press release, related to their area of expertise.

 

For further information visit www.horizonteminerals.com or contact:

 

Horizonte Minerals plc

Jeremy Martin (CEO)

+44 (0) 203 356 2901

Numis Securities Ltd (NOMAD & Joint Broker)

John Prior

Paul Gillam

+44 (0) 207 260 1000

Shard Capital (Joint Broker)

Damon Heath

Erik Woolgar

+44 (0) 20 186 9952

Tavistock (Financial PR)

Emily Fenton

Gareth Tredway

 

+44 (0) 207 920 3150

 

About Horizonte Minerals:

Horizonte Minerals plc is an AIM and TSX-listed nickel development company focused in Brazil. The Company is developing the Araguaia project, as the next major ferronickel mine in Brazil, and the Vermelho nickel-cobalt project, with the aim of being able to supply nickel and cobalt to the EV battery market. Both projects are 100% owned.

Horizonte shareholders include: Teck Resources Limited, Canaccord Genuity Group, JP Morgan, Lombard Odier Asset Management (Europe) Limited, City Financial, Richard Griffiths and Glencore.

Glossary of technical terms

AACE

Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering

AACE Class 3

+-10% +15% accuracy

Agglomerated

Made into small lumps

Al2O3

Aluminium Oxide

ANN

Araguaia Nickel North (the Northern deposit)

ANS

Araguaia Nickel South (the Southern deposits)

C1

C1 cash cost as defined by Brook Hunt

Calcine

Output from the kiln which is ore that is reduced by heating in the presence of oxygen and coal

Capex

Capital cost

Co

Cobalt

Cut-off grade

Lowest grade of mineralisation material considered economic, used in the calculation of ore resources

Cr2O3

Chromium Oxide

Dilution

Waste or low-grade material accidently mined with the ore

EPC

Engineering Procurement and Construction

EPCM

Engineering Procurement and Construction Management

EV

Electric Vehicles

Fe

Iron

FeNi30

Ferronickel with 30% Nickel and 70% Iron

Ferronickel or FeNi

An alloy that contains approximately 30% nickel and 70% iron and is the produced by the project as an ingot

HZM, Horizonte or the Company

Horizonte Minerals plc

IFC

International Finance Corporation

IRR

Internal Rate of Return

Kt

Thousand Tonnes (metric)

LME

London Metal Exchange

LOM

Life of mine

Loss

Ore that is unintentionally left behind or mined as waste

MgO

Magnesium Oxide

MT

Million Tonnes (metric)

Ni

Nickel

NPV8

Net present value at an 8% discount rate

Opex

Operating cost

Ore

A naturally occurring solid material from which a metal or valuable mineral can be extracted profitably

PEA

Preliminary Economic Assessment

Reverse Circulation Drilling

A rock drilling system that circulates drill cuttings through the centre of the drill rod so that they can be collected and assayed without contamination

RKEF

Rotating Kiln Electric Furnace is the process by which nickel laterite ore is reduced and then melted in so that metal is separated from the slag to produce ferronickel

ROM

Run of mine stockpile

Shotted

Formation of small pellets from molten material

SiO2

Silicon Dioxide

Tpa

Tonnes (metric) per annum

US$

United States Dollar

WM

Wood Mackenzie

Mineral Reserves

Mineral Reserves are sub-divided into 2 categories. The highest level of Reserves or the level with the most confidence is the `Proven’ category and the lower level of confidence of the Reserves is the `Probable’ category. Reserves are distinguished from resources as all of the technical and economic parameters have been applied and the estimated grade and tonnage of the resources should closely approximate the actual results of mining. The guidelines state “Mineral Reserves are inclusive of the diluting material that will be mined in conjunction with the Mineral Reserve and delivered to the treatment plant or equivalent facility.” The guidelines also state that, “The term `Mineral Reserve’ need not necessarily signify that extraction facilities are in place or operative or that all government approvals have been received. It does signify that there are reasonable expectations of such approvals.

 

Proven Mineral Reserves

A `Proven Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.

 

Probable Mineral Reserves

A `Probable Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of an Indicated and in some circumstances a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by a least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.

 

Minerals Resource

Mineral Resources are sub-divided into 3 categories depending on the geological confidence. The highest level with the most confidence is the `Measured’ category. The next level of confidence is the `Indicated’ category and the lowest level, or the resource with the least confidence, is the `Inferred’ category.

 

Indicated Mineral Resource

An `Indicated Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough for geological and grade continuity to be reasonably assumed.

 

Measured Mineral Resource

A `Measured Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are so well established that they can be estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support production planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough to confirm both geological and grade continuity.

 

Inferred Mineral Resource

An `Inferred Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on the basis of geological evidence and limited sampling and reasonably assumed, but not verified, geological and grade continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling, gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes.

 

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION

Except for statements of historical fact relating to the Company, certain information contained in this press release constitutes “forward-looking information” under Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, the ability of the Company to complete the Acquisition as described herein, statements with respect to the potential of the Company’s current or future property mineral projects; the success of exploration and mining activities; cost and timing of future exploration, production and development; the estimation of mineral resources and reserves and the ability of the Company to achieve its goals in respect of growing its mineral resources; the ability of the Company to complete the Placing as described herein, and the realization of mineral resource and reserve estimates. Generally, forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will be taken”, “occur” or “be achieved”. Forward-looking information is based on the reasonable assumptions, estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date that such statements are made, and are inherently subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including but not limited to risks related to: the inability of the Company to complete the Acquisition as described herein, exploration and mining risks, competition from competitors with greater capital; the Company’s lack of experience with respect to development-stage mining operations; fluctuations in metal prices; uninsured risks; environmental and other regulatory requirements; exploration, mining and other licences; the Company’s future payment obligations; potential disputes with respect to the Company’s title to, and the area of, its mining concessions; the Company’s dependence on its ability to obtain sufficient financing in the future; the Company’s dependence on its relationships with third parties; the Company’s joint ventures; the potential of currency fluctuations and political or economic instability  in countries in which the Company operates; currency exchange fluctuations; the Company’s ability to manage its growth effectively; the trading market for the ordinary shares of the Company; uncertainty with respect to the Company’s plans to continue to develop its operations and new projects; the Company’s dependence on key personnel; possible conflicts of interest of directors and officers of the Company, the inability of the Company to complete the Placing on the terms as described herein, and various risks associated with the legal and regulatory framework within which the Company operates. Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.


[1] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate

[2] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine

[3] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate

[4] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine

[5] Wood Mackenzie Short term forecast – see market section of NI 43 -101

[6] Source: Glencore

[7] Data from Wood Mackenzie cost curve

[8] Stage 1 only, C1 cash costs as per FS

[9] The physicals and cashflow assessment presented as Stage 2 in the table are preliminary in nature and are based on a mine schedule and an estimate of the additional plant and equipment needed to achieve the additional capacity. The capital costs for the additional plant and equipment are based on the FS costs, and the cost of installation and civil engineering are factored from the FS costs.  Operating costs at the increased capacity are factored based on the FS operating cost estimate.

[10] Includes low grade stockpiles processed at the end of the schedule

[11] Increased process rate commences after year 3

[12] 28 years mining following by 3 years of low grade stockpile processing

[13] 26 years mining followed by 2 years of low grade stockpile processing

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

European Metals Holdings Limited – Results of Annual General Meeting

In accordance with Listing Rule 3.13.2, the Directors of European Metals Holdings Limited (“European Metals” or “the Company”) are pleased to advise that all resolutions put to shareholders at today’s Annual General Meeting were passed by a show of hands.

The information required by section 251AA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in respect of each resolution passed at the meeting is set out below.

PROXY VOTES

RESOLUTION

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAIN

PROXY DISCRETION

1.    Re-election of Director – Mr David Reeves

55,926,374

2.    Ratification of Prior Issue of CDIs – Placement

27,823,244

28,096,470

3.    Approval of 10% Placement Capacity

55,926,374

4.    Issue of A Class Performance Shares to Related Parties

51,906,130

4,020,244

5.    Issue of A Class Performance Shares to Non-Related Parties

55,919,714

6,660

6.    Ratification of Prior Issue of CDIs – Placement

27,823,244

28,096,470

 

ENQUIRIES:

European Metals Holdings Limited

Keith Coughlan, Managing Director

Kiran Morzaria, Non-Executive Director

Julia Beckett, Company Secretary

Tel: +61 (0) 419 996 333

Email: keith@europeanmet.com

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7440 0647

Tel: +61 (0) 8 6245 2057

Email: julia@europeanmet.com

Beaumont Cornish (Nomad & Broker)

Michael Cornish

Roland Cornish

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7628 3396

Email: corpfin@b-cornish.co.uk

Shard Capital (Joint Broker)

Damon Health

Erik Woolgar

Tel:  +44 (0) 20 7186 9950

WH Ireland (Joint Broker)

James Joyce

James Sinclair-Ford

Tel: +44 (0) 207 220 1666

 

The information contained within this announcement is considered to be inside information, for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014, prior to its release.  The person who arranged for the release of this announcement on behalf of the Company was Keith Coughlan, Managing Director.

 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Riverfort Global Opportunities Plc – Directorate Change

The Board of RiverFort Global Opportunities plc is pleased to announce the appointment of Philip Haydn-Slater as Non-Executive Chairman of the Company, effective from 1 January 2019. At the same time, Nicholas Lee, the current Chairman of the Company, will be taking up a new role as Investment Director of the Company.  This will enable him to focus more specifically on the execution of the Company’s investing strategy and the deployment of its investment capital, working closely with the Company’s investment adviser, RiverFort Global Capital Limited.

 

Mr Haydn-Slater has over 35 years of experience in stockbroking and commodities with a number of well-known stock broking firms. He spent eight years as Head of Corporate Broking at WH Ireland Limited in London, where he was responsible for originating and managing equity transactions, including IPOs and secondary placings for corporate clients on AIM and other international exchanges including the Australian and Canadian stock exchanges largely in the natural resources sector. Mr Haydn-Slater has also worked in London and Sydney for various financial institutions including ABN Amro, Bankers Trust, James Capel & Co and Bain Securities (Deutsche Bank) Sydney.  More recently, given his wealth of experience, he has acted as an independent director on the boards of a number of public and private companies.

In terms of corporate governance going forward, Mr Haydn-Slater and Ms van Dyke will be regarded by the Board as independent directors, whilst Mr Lee and Mr Nesbitt will be regarded as non-independent given, respectively, their executive role and relationship with the Company’s investment adviser, RiverFort Global Capital Limited.

 

As part of his appointment, Mr Haydn-Slater has agreed, in the short term, to acquire an additional 150 million ordinary shares in the Company in the market which, in addition to his existing shareholding of 50 million, would increase his total holding to 200 million shares.  He will also receive warrants to subscribe for 100 million ordinary shares in the Company exercisable at 0.12 pence per share. These warrants will vest in three equal instalments over a three-year period from the date of his appointment with the Company.

 

Nicholas Lee, Investment Director, commented:

 

“We are very pleased that Philip has agreed to join the Board and we look forward to benefiting from his knowledge and experience of public markets. I am also looking forward to my new role of focusing more on investment opportunities for the Company.”

 

Philip Haydn-Slater, Non-Executive Chairman, commented:

 

“I am very pleased to be joining the Board at this exciting time for the Company and look forward to contributing to the Company’s future development”

 

Current and past directorships or partnerships for Philip Haydn-Slater, aged 58, are set out below:

 

Current                                                                      Past

ADX Energy Limited                                                   Sacgasco Limited                                                                RA International plc                                                  HD Capital Holdings LLP

Danube Petroleum Limited                                      HD Capital Markets Ltd

Musgrave Financial Limited                                     Six String Productions Limited

Eclipse Film Partners LLP                                          Synergis Capital PLC

Musgrave Merchant Limited                                    

 

 

There is no further information relating to Philip Hayden-Slater required to be disclosed under Schedule Two, (g) (i)-(viii).

 

This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014.

 

For more information please contact:

RiverFort Global Opportunities plc:

+44 20 7580 7576

Nicholas Lee, Investment Director

 

Nominated Advisor:

+44 20 7628 3396

 

Beaumont Cornish

 

Roland Cornish/Felicity Geidt

 

Joint Broker:

Shard Capital Partners LLP               

Damon Heath

Erik Woolgar

 

Joint Broker:

Peterhouse Corporate Finance         

Lucy Williams

 

+44 20 7186 9950

 

 

 

 

+44 20 7562 3351

 

 

 

 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Jubilee Metals Group Plc – TR-1: Notification of major holdings

TR-1: Standard form for notification of major holdings

 

NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR HOLDINGS

1a. Identity of the issuer or the underlying issuer of existing shares to which voting rights are attachedii:

Jubilee Metals Group plc

Company No 4459850

4th floor, 2 Cromwell Place, London SW7 2JE

1b. Please indicate if the issuer is a non-UK issuer  (please mark with an “X” if appropriate)

Non-UK issuer

2. Reason for the notification (please mark the appropriate box or boxes with an “X”)

An acquisition or disposal of voting rights

An acquisition or disposal of financial instruments

X

An event changing the breakdown of voting rights

Other (please specify)iii:

3. Details of person subject to the notification obligationiv

Name

Quantock plc

City and country of registered office (if applicable)

Victoria, Mahe, Seychelles

4. Full name of shareholder(s) (if different from 3.)v

Name

City and country of registered office (if applicable)

5. Date on which the threshold was crossed or reachedvi:

December 13, 2018

6. Date on which issuer notified (DD/MM/YYYY):

December 13, 2018

7. Total positions of person(s) subject to the notification obligation

% of voting rights attached to shares (total of 8. A)

% of voting rights through financial instruments
(total of 8.B 1 + 8.B 2)

Total of both in % (8.A + 8.B)

Total number of voting rights of issuervii

Resulting situation on the date on which threshold was crossed or reached

3.23

nil

3.23

1,363,486,229

Position of previous notification (if

applicable)

nil

nil

nil

 

8. Notified details of the resulting situation on the date on which the threshold was crossed or reachedviii

A: Voting rights attached to shares

Class/type of
shares

ISIN code (if possible)

Number of voting rightsix

% of voting rights

Direct

(Art 9 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.1)

Indirect

(Art 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.2.1)

Direct

(Art 9 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.1)

Indirect

(Art 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.2.1)

GB0031852162

44,000,000

3.23

SUBTOTAL 8. A

44,000,000

3.23

 

 

B 1: Financial Instruments according to Art. 13(1)(a) of Directive 2004/109/EC (DTR5.3.1.1 (a))

Type of financial instrument

Expiration
date
x

Exercise/
Conversion Period
xi

Number of voting rights that may be acquired if the instrument is

exercised/converted.

% of voting rights

SUBTOTAL 8. B 1

 

 

B 2: Financial Instruments with similar economic effect according to Art. 13(1)(b) of Directive 2004/109/EC (DTR5.3.1.1 (b))

Type of financial instrument

Expiration
date
x

Exercise/
Conversion Period
xi

Physical or cash

settlementxii

Number of voting rights

% of voting rights

SUBTOTAL 8.B.2

 

 

 

9. Information in relation to the person subject to the notification obligation (please mark the

applicable box with an “X”)

Person subject to the notification obligation is not controlled by any natural person or legal entity and does not control any other undertaking(s) holding directly or indirectly an interest in the (underlying) issuerxiii

X

Full chain of controlled undertakings through which the voting rights and/or the financial instruments are effectively held starting with the ultimate controlling natural person or legal entityxiv (please add additional rows as necessary)

Namexv

% of voting rights if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

% of voting rights through financial instruments if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

Total of both if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

10. In case of proxy voting, please identify:

Name of the proxy holder

The number and % of voting rights held

The date until which the voting rights will be held

11. Additional informationxvi

Place of completion

Hamilton, Bermuda

Date of completion

December 14, 2018

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

European Metals Holdings Limited – Result of AGM

In accordance with Listing Rule 3.13.2, the Directors of European Metals Holdings Limited (“European Metals” or “the Company”) are pleased to advise that all resolutions put to shareholders at today’s Annual General Meeting were passed by a show of hands.

The information required by section 251AA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) in respect of each resolution passed at the meeting is set out below.

PROXY VOTES

RESOLUTION

FOR

AGAINST

ABSTAIN

PROXY DISCRETION

1.    Re-election of Director – Mr David Reeves

55,926,374

2.    Ratification of Prior Issue of CDIs – Placement

27,823,244

28,096,470

3.    Approval of 10% Placement Capacity

55,926,374

4.    Issue of A Class Performance Shares to Related Parties

51,906,130

4,020,244

5.    Issue of A Class Performance Shares to Non-Related Parties

55,919,714

6,660

6.    Ratification of Prior Issue of CDIs – Placement

27,823,244

28,096,470

 

ENQUIRIES:

European Metals Holdings Limited

Keith Coughlan, Managing Director

Kiran Morzaria, Non-Executive Director

Julia Beckett, Company Secretary

Tel: +61 (0) 419 996 333

Email: keith@europeanmet.com

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7440 0647

Tel: +61 (0) 8 6245 2057

Email: julia@europeanmet.com

Beaumont Cornish (Nomad & Broker)

Michael Cornish

Roland Cornish

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7628 3396

Email: corpfin@b-cornish.co.uk

Shard Capital (Joint Broker)

Damon Health

Erik Woolgar

Tel:  +44 (0) 20 7186 9950

WH Ireland (Joint Broker)

James Joyce

James Sinclair-Ford

Tel: +44 (0) 207 220 1666

The information contained within this announcement is considered to be inside information, for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014, prior to its release.  The person who arranged for the release of this announcement on behalf of the Company was Keith Coughlan, Managing Director.

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Jubilee Metals Group Plc – Commissioning of fine chrome operation commences

Highlights

At PlatCro

·     PlatCro’s pre-classification and dewatering circuit commences production of PGM rich material for refining at Northam’s Eland Platinum plant

·     Production at PlatCro will be ramped up, targeting the production of 60 000 tonnes per month of PGM rich material, more than doubling Jubilee’s current PGM processing rate

 

At DCM

·     Jubilee’s state of the art DCM fine chrome plant commenced commissioning

·     The DCM fine chrome plant will be ramped up to 25 000 tonnes per month of additional capacity over the next 4 weeks targeting the production of 8 000 tonnes per month of fine chrome concentrate

 

Leon Coetzer, CEO says: “I am extremely pleased at yet another leading performance by the Jubilee team delivering the PlatCro pre-processing circuit and the DCM fine chrome plant on-time and in budget. Both projects involve leading edge processes as we continuously strive to deliver industry leading solutions to the benefit of all our stakeholders.

We have recently announced our acquisition of the PlatCro chrome beneficiation operation which we intend to integrate with our current PlatCro PGM project, forming a fully integrated operation to further streamline costs and optimise metal earnings.  The addition of the PlatCro pre-processing plant to produce PGM rich material for further refining at the Eland Platinum plant, is the first of a number of processing improvements targeted for the integrated PlatCro operation.   

I am particularly pleased with the implementation of our industry first DCM fine chrome plant.  Our ability to target the recovery of the fine chrome element of existing mine waste material opens tremendous opportunities to Jubilee for further growth in the chrome industry. We will target to roll out this solution at our existing operations at Hernic and PlatCro, as well as the wider chrome industry.”

 

17 December 2018

Jubilee Metals Group PLC

Colin Bird/Leon Coetzer
Tel +44 (0) 20 7584 2155 / Tel +27 (0) 11 465 1913

Nominated Adviser

SPARK Advisory Partners Limited
Andrew Emmott/Vassil Kirtchev
Tel: +44 (0) 203 368 3555

Broker

Shard Capital Partners LLP
Damon Heath/Erik Woolgar
Tel +44 (0) 20 7 186 9900

JSE Sponsor

Sasfin Capital (a member of the Sasfin group)

Sharon Owens
Tel +27 (0) 11 809 7500

 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

RiverFort Global Opportunities – Investment Update

Since the announcement of the Company’s 2018 third quarter update on 15 November 2018, the Company has continued to be active in deploying its capital in RiverFort-arranged investments.  The Company has now invested over £3.1 million, compared to the figure as at 15 November 2018 of £2.7 million.  The Company’s recent activity includes making investments in certain AIM and ASX listed companies including further investments in a secured mezzanine loan for EQTEC PLC (an AIM-listed waste gasification company – market capitalisation £14 million) and in a secured convertible loan for Artemis Resources Limited (an ASX-listed mining company – market capitalisation AUS$81 million). Consequently, the percentage of the Company’s investment portfolio that comprises income generating RiverFort-arranged investments continues to increase and now represents a significant part of the Company’s net asset value.

Nicholas Lee, Chairman commented:

” We are very much on track in terms of implementing our strategy of investing in attractive income generating opportunities.  We expect the demand for our investment funds to increase given the uncertain markets that we are in today.”

 

This announcement contains inside information for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014.

For more information please contact:

RiverFort Global Opportunities plc +44 20 7580 7576
Nicholas Lee, Chairman
Nominated Adviser +44 20 7628 3396
Beaumont Cornish
Roland Cornish/Felicity Geidt
Joint Broker +44 20 7186 9950
Shard Capital Partners LLP
Damon Heath/ Erik Woolgar
Joint Broker +44 20 7562 3351
Peterhouse Corporate Finance
Lucy Williams

 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Erris Resources Plc – Update on Centerra Gold Joint Venture

Update on Centerra Gold Joint Venture Exploration Programmes

 

Erris Resources plc, the European focused mineral exploration company with a portfolio of zinc and base metals projects in Ireland and gold projects in Sweden, provides an update on the Centerra funded exploration programmes in Sweden.  

 

Brännberg Project

 A total of 14 holes totalling 2,681.7m were drilled between July and September with full results received during November into early December 2018. The drilling tested the down dip and along-strike continuations of mineralisation intersected in historic drilling by Beowulf Mining. Drilling also tested new ground magnetic anomalies and IP chargeability anomalies. All holes encountered strong alteration zones and traces of mineralisation including veinlets and disseminations of arsenopyrite and chalcopyrite. Gold is associated with a stockwork of sheeted quartz-arsenopyrite veins and the increased vein density in BB001 and BB004 may be related to a localised kink on a main NW-trending structure. The core of the mineralised zone has significant intersections over a strike of 150m while mineralisation is open at depth with copper and arsenic increasing down dip.

 

Highlights include:

BB001: 7.55m @ 1.15g/t Au, 1.93% As, 0.1% Cu from 108.25m-115.80m

BB002: 1.95m @ 2.07g/t Au, 2.20% As, 0.13% Cu from 124.45m-126.40m

BB003: 1.65m @ 8.14g/t Au, 0.67% As, 0.01% Cu from 52.90m-54.55m

BB004: 17.2m @ 1.93g/t Au, 3.06% As, 0.26% Cu from 160.90m-178.10m

 

Drilling to date has only tested approximately 900m along a single corridor within the 5,285Ha permit block. Drill results confirm that there is a gold system at Brännberg that warrants further work. The project is only 10.8km from the active Maurliden Mine (Boliden) and 6.2km from a closed mine (Mensträsk).

 

Centerra Gold has elected not to continue drilling on the Brännberg Project due to the mineralised system not demonstrating the size to host a > 1-million-ounce gold deposit. The project now reverts back 100% to Erris Resources and the Company will undertake follow up work to determine the resource potential of the project and consider whether it can be advanced on its own or potentially in partnership with a junior gold developer.

 

Further information regarding the drilling results from the Brännberg project is set out in the appendix to this announcement.

 

Käringberget Project

 

A ground EM survey carried out in February 2018 failed to identify any conductors that warranted drill testing and the planned drill programme at Käringberget was reduced to two exploration holes. The two holes were drilled to test magnetic anomalies identified during a ground magnetometer survey. The holes failed to intersect significant mineralisation with the anomaly caused by disseminated pyrrhotite barren of gold and base metals. Centerra Gold has also made the decision not to advance this project based on the results to date with Erris in agreement on the limited potential of the project once the magnetic anomalies had been tested.  No further work will be carried out and the ground relinquished.

 

New Generative Programme

 

The Company is pleased to announce that Centerra Gold has elected to continue its generative agreement with the Company covering Sweden and has also expanded the programme into Finland.  Under the terms of the agreement, Centerra Gold is committed to spend $250,000 on generative exploration work in 2019 with the option to elect individual projects to earn a 70% interest by spending US$3 million, as to 51% by spending US$1 million and an additional 19% by spending US$2 million.

 

Erris Resources CEO, Anton du Plessis, said, “While the results at Brännberg did not return the potential for a plus million ounce gold deposit in line with Centerra’s size criteria, there is still potential for a smaller gold deposit that could be suitable for a small to mid size gold producer.  This is low cost exploration whereby targets are tested in a rapid and efficient way, and if they do not deliver the required criteria we move onto the next target.   As part of this ongoing exploration work, we are delighted to continue our strategic alliance with Centerra Gold and have its support as we continue to generate new exploration opportunities in Northern Sweden and expand the remit into Finland for 2019.  The continuation of the Centerra programme acknowledges the cost-efficient testing of targets by Erris and the ability to continue to generate new targets – a key factor for exploration success. We remain focused on creating shareholder value through commercial discovery of base or precious metal assets in proven mineral districts and in favourable European jurisdictions and look forward to updating the market as we advance the 2019 programmes.”

 

Further Information regarding the Erris-Centerra strategic alliance

 

 

The strategy of the Erris-Centerra strategic alliance in Sweden and now in Finland is to generate new gold targets, undertake mapping, sampling, geophysics surveys and if merited drill test the best targets with the objective of making a significant new discovery. The strategic alliance is fully funded by Centerra Gold, with Erris as the operator on the ground receiving a management fee for performing the exploration work. The Company is actively exploring ground with new permit applications submitted in Northern Sweden. Targets which do not demonstrate potential for an economic gold resource >1Moz are surrendered from the alliance. The exploration permit system in Sweden allows the Company to very efficiently test and turn over projects. To date, the alliance has drilled 9,341m on three projects.

 

As part of the current generative work, two new applications were submitted over new targets in Northern Sweden and a reservation application has been submitted over a priority gold target in Finland.  These new areas will be advanced in the first half of 2019.

 

The technical information in this announcement has been compiled on behalf of Erris by Aiden Lavelle. Aiden Lavell (BSc (Hons), MSc, MIGI, P.Geo ) is Erris’  chief operating officer. Mr Lavelle has sufficient experience relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration, and to the activity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person in accordance with the guidance note for Mining, Oil & Gas Companies issued by the London Stock Exchange in respect of AIM Companies, which outlines standards of disclosure for mineral projects. Mr Lavelle consents to the inclusion in this announcement of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears.

 

*ENDS*

 

For further information visit www.errisresources.com or contact:

 

Anton du Plessis /Aiden Lavelle

Erris Resources plc

+353 (0) 94 902 8481

David Hart/Liz Kirchner

Allenby Capital (Nominated Adviser)

+44 (0) 20 3328 5656

Erik Woolgar

Shard Capital (Joint Broker)

+44 (0) 20 7186 9952

Andy Thacker

Turner Pope Investments (TPI) Ltd (Joint Broker)

+44 (0) 20 3621 4120

Isabel de Salis/Gaby Jenner

St Brides Partners (Financial PR)

+44 (0) 20 7236 1177

 

 

Appendix

 

To view a version of this announcement with illustrative images, please use the following link:

http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/3176K_1-2018-12-12.pdf

Further information regarding significant results from drilling completed to date at the Brännberg project

 

Table of significant results from drilling completed to date at the Brännberg project

Hole ID

Length m

From

To

Au g/t

As %

Cu %

Comment

BB001

27.70

98.85

126.55

0.61

0.84

0.06

BB001

7.55

108.25

115.80

1.15

1.93

0.10

BB002

12.30

114.10

126.40

0.88

0.70

0.05

inc. BB002

2.85

115.65

118.50

1.17

1.05

0.02

inc. BB002

1.95

124.45

126.40

2.07

2.20

0.13

inc. BB002

1.80

135.90

137.70

0.85

0.19

0.02

BB002

1.50

162.40

163.90

0.79

0.17

0.01

BB003

13.45

41.10

54.55

1.18

0.45

0.01

inc. BB003

1.65

52.90

54.55

8.14

0.67

0.01

BB003

2.55

75.50

78.05

0.74

0.78

0.01

BB003

3.15

91.50

94.65

0.57

0.36

0.04

BB004

20.80

158.80

179.60

1.71

2.73

0.23

inc. BB004

17.20

160.90

178.10

1.93

3.06

0.26

inc. BB004

2.80

161.90

164.70

3.51

2.91

0.46

BB005

2.10

148.80

150.90

0.51

0.01

0.17

BB006

No significant intersection

BB007

No significant intersection

BB008

1.55

85.85

87.40

0.51

0.61

0.09

BB009

No significant intersection

BB010

5.45

82.80

88.25

0.59

3.07

0.10

BB011

No significant intersection

BB012

No significant intersection

 

 

 

 

Notes

Erris Resources plc (EPIC: ERIS.L) is an AIM quoted, European focused, discovery driven exploration company.  Supported by Canadian mining majors, Osisko Gold Royalties, which has a 18.9% interest in the Company, and Centerra Gold KB Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of TSX listed Centerra Gold Inc., the Company has an established portfolio of zinc and base metals assets in Ireland and gold projects in Sweden, which it is looking to further build on.  Led by a highly qualified team with extensive corporate and sector experience, Erris Resources’ strategy is to create shareholder value through commercial discovery of base or precious metal assets in proven mineral districts and in favourable European jurisdictions.

 

 

 

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Horizonte Minerals Plc – Araguaia NI 43-101 FS Filed and Stage 2 Expansion

Horizonte Minerals Plc, (AIM/TSX: HZM) (‘Horizonte’ or ‘the Company’) the nickel development company focused in Brazil, is pleased to announce that it has filed the Feasibility Study (‘FS’ or the ‘Study’) for the Araguaia Ferronickel Project (‘Araguaia’, or ‘the Project’) in Brazil’s Pará State on SEDAR.  The Study has been prepared in accordance with the National Instrument 43-101 – standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (‘NI 43-101’) and was previously announced on the 29th October 2018.

The Study confirms Araguaia as a Tier 1 project with a large high-grade scalable resource, a long mine life and a low-cost source of ferronickel for the stainless-steel industry. The Stage 1 FS design allows for future construction of a second Rotary Kiln Electric Furnace (‘RKEF’) process line (‘Stage 2 expansion’ or ‘Stage 2’), with potential to double Araguaia’s production capacity from 14,500 tonnes per annum (‘t/a’) nickel up to 29,000 t/a nickel. The results of this Stage 2 expansion study are included as an opportunity in Section 25 of the NI 43-101 Technical Report with the economics highlighted below.

Stage 1 – FS Highlights:

·     Initial 28-year mine life generates cash flows after taxation of US$1.6 billion with sufficient mineral resources to extend beyond 28 years;

·     Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[1] (‘NPV’) of US$401 million[2] and Internal Rate of Return (‘IRR’) of 20.1% using the base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000 per tonne3 (‘/t’);

·     Upon development, the Project is expected to produce an average of 14,500 tonnes of nickel contained within approximately 52,000 tonnes ferronickel per annum, utilising the proven RKEF technology currently used at over 40 mines around the world;

·     The base case FS economics assume a flat nickel price of US$14,000/t for the entire 28-year mine life based on Wood Mackenzie’s short-term forecast;

·     C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to year 10 of US$3.08 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$6,794/t), making Araguaia a low-cost producer;

·     Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the post-tax NPV increases to US$740 million with an IRR of 28.1%, reflecting the significant leverage that the Project returns have to any future increase in nickel prices; and

·     Capital cost estimate of US$443 million (AACE class 3), including US$65.3 million of contingencies equating to 17.2% of total capex budget.

Stage 2 – Second Line Expansion Highlights:

A key part of the FS Stage 1 Project design was that the RKEF plant and associated infrastructure was designed to accommodate the addition of a second RKEF process line (Stage 2 expansion), with potential to double Araguaia’s production capacity from 14,500 t/a nickel up to 29,000 t/a nickel. The Project Mineral Resource inventory has the grade and scale to support the increase in plant throughput from 900 kt/pa (Stage 1) to the Stage 2 rate of 1.8 Mt/a supporting the twin line RKEF flow sheet. The Stage 2 expansion assumes operating at Stage 1 production rate of 900 kt/pa for three years, after which free cash flows would be reinvested to expand the plant to 1.8 Mt/pa by the addition of a second line. All figures below represent this combined production of stage 1 for 3 years followed by the enlarged production for the remainder of the Life of Mine. 

·     The Stage 2 expansion, assumed in year 3, supports a 26-year mine life generating cash flows after taxation of US$2.6 billion;

·     No increase in upfront capital cost which remains at the same level at the FS Stage 1 of US$443 million, the Stage 2 expansion is financed through operational cash flow;

·     Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[3] (‘NPV’) of US$741 million[4] and Internal Rate of Return (‘IRR’) of 23.8% using the base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000/t[5];

·     Using a nickel price of US$11,000/t generates cash flows after taxation and payback of capital of US$1.0 billion;

·     Nickel grade of 1.82% for the first 10 years of the Stage 2 operation;

·     Annual nickel production of 29,000 t/a;

·     C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to Year 10 of US$3.00 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$6,613/t), making Araguaia a low-cost producer. Life of mine C1 cash cost of US$3.51 per pound (‘/lb’) of nickel (US$7,737/t); and

·     Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the post-tax NPV8 for the Stage 2 option increases to US$1,264 million with an IRR of 31.8%.

Horizonte CEO, Jeremy Martin, commented; 

“Following on from the successful completion of the Feasibility Study for the Araguaia ferronickel project, we are very pleased to file the 43-101 Feasibility Technical Report which includes as an opportunity the Stage 2 expansion to add a second RKEF line to the Project. The Stage 2 expansion would potentially increase annual nickel production from 14,500 tonnes per annum to 29,000 tonnes per annum whilst demonstrating economies of scale for both operating and capital costs.  For this scenario the upfront pre-production capital cost remains unchanged at US$443 million and the incremental capital expenditure to build the stage 2 expansion, is anticipated to be financed out of operational free cash flow. The FS design of the RKEF plant and all associated infrastructure was configured to allow a second RKEF line to be added at a future time, as such the Stage 2 expansion benefits from the existing utilities and infrastructure expenditure. Significant items such as the powerline, water pipeline, overall process plant site, utilities, and slag storage facility already have sufficient capacity built in during the Stage 1 planning to meet the desired production increase.

The economics of the Stage 2 expansion in year 3 are compelling with the Base Case NPV8 of US$741 million and IRR of 23.8%, increasing to an IRR of 31.8% when applying consensus nickel price assuming no change in the upfront capital investment for the Stage 1 single line RKEF plant as shown in the FS.  If we apply a nickel price of US$11,000 per tonne nickel, the enlarged twin line plant generates cash flows after taxation and pay back of capital of US$1.0 billion.

We have always maintained that Araguaia has a high grade scalable mineral resource with only a small part utilised for the single line plant.  As demonstrated in the Stage 2 expansion the resource can comfortably support the increased capacity for over 26 years with the first 10 years averaging 1.82% nickel which places Araguaia on the upper range of the global grade curve even with the increased mining rate. 

The recent weakness in nickel prices appears to be reflection of macroeconomics and does not appear to have impacted wider consensus of the positive future potential of the nickel market. Demand versus supply deficits remain forecast for the short term. Inventories on the LME continue to fall with significant new supply required for the stainless-steel market which is growing at 5%[6] year on year, with new demand driven from the EV battery sector. Araguaia is anticipated to come online in 2021 and be placed in the lower quartile[7] on the laterite C1 cost curve (year 1 to year 10 of US$3.08 per pound of nickel (US$6,794/t)[8] making it one of the lower cost new nickel projects. Meanwhile the forward C1 cost curve is expected to consistently rise due to the rising costs of inputs as well as the reducing global grade profile across existing mines.

The successful completion of the Feasibility Study and the positive economics from the Stage 2 expansion all confirm that Araguaia is a tier 1 asset demonstrating flexibility and scalability with compelling economics.

The Company is well funded as we work to advance Araguaia to the construction stage and start to advance our second 100% owned Vermelho Nickel Cobalt project as part of the company’s strategy to become a leading nickel development Company. I look forward to updating the market on progress as we move into 2019.”

The FS plant ore feed rate of 900kt/a is based on a single line RKEF plant (Stage 1). This size plant represents the optimal capacity for an achievable capital cost for project financing for a single project junior development company. However, the Stage 1 plant capacity underutilises the significant Mineral Resource that HZM has within the project area (~119Mt Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources at 1.27% Ni).  In the FS, the cut-off grade is 1.4% Ni and represents a “high-grade” option. The marginal cut-off grade for the Project is closer to 1.0% Ni. This means that there is a significant quantity of potentially economic material that is not mined or processed in the current Stage 1 FS schedule. Accordingly, the opportunity contemplated here is that the Stage 1 production scenario (the FS Base Case) is built and produces at an initial production level 14,500 t/a of Nickel, and that the Stage 2, expansion in year 3 is implemented as the project starts generating cash flows, thereby increasing total production to 29,000 t/a Nickel.

To explore the potential value of increasing the production rate at Araguaia, a Stage 2 expansion to 1,800kt/a plant feed in Year 3 was contemplated at a scoping level. In this Stage 2 scenario, Snowden completed pit optimisations based on the FS costs and modifying factors. The pit optimisations targeted any material determined to be economic, rather than the elevated Ni cut-off grade applied in the FS. Only Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources were considered in this scenario. Overall, the target was to achieve a similar mine life to the FS schedule (~28 years). This was achieved by selecting a revenue factor pit shell equivalent to a nickel price of US$11,200/t Ni which yields 44.0Mt of ore feed.

The Stage 1 FS plant layout was designed to allow for the future construction of a second RKEF line.  A significant portion of the Stage 1 RKEF plant and associated infrastructure has sufficient capacity to support the Stage 2 expansion, resulting in substantially lower capital costs to implement the second RKEF line. The Stage 1 equipment and infrastructure that does not require upgrading for Stage 2 includes;

·     The main power line to the plant;

·     The principle road and bridge infrastructure in-bound and outbound to the mine site;

·     Overall plant site layout, plant road / offices / stores / workshops;

·     Refinery facility;

·     The slag storage facility; and

·     Water abstraction pipeline.

As part of the preparation of the Stage 2 expansion, HZM has completed a scoping level estimate of the costs associated with implementing a second RKEF line after Year 3 of the mine life using the FS capex as a basis and locating the additional equipment in the areas within the existing FS plant layout. A summary of the estimated direct equipment costs along with associated civil works and installation costs for the Stage 2 expansion are shown in Table 1.

Table 1  Stage 1 and Stage 2 capex

WBS

Area

Stage 1 FS Pre- production Capex

(US$ million)

Stage 2 – Second RKEF line Pre- production Capex

 (US$ million)

Equipment Additions for

Stage 2

1000

Mine

6.0

NA

3000

Ore Preparation

39.0

25.2

Dryer

4000

Pyrometallurgy

137.5

109.2

Kiln, Furnace

5000

Material Supply

21.4

8.6

Coal pulverisation

6000

Utilities and Infrastructure

106.9

18.5

Substation, water pumping, cooling dam lift, water cooling pipe

7000

Buildings

9.1

0.6

Admin, change house, canteen

8000

Indirect Costs

82.4

22.0

EPCM, Owners, Construction Camp, engineering

Contingency

41.0

15.6

Contingency

Total capex

443.1

199.7

The additional costs for the Stage 2 – Second RKEF line shown in Table 1 above, represent sustaining capital expenditure which would be financed once the Stage 1 operation is cash flow positive. Therefore, the pre-production capital costs would remain the same as the FS at US$443.1 million.

Key additional items required within the plant area for Phase 2 are included in Table 1; ore preparation dryer, kiln and furnace. Items outside of the plant area include additional pumping capacity for the water abstraction pipeline, a second plant cooling water pipeline and an increase in the cooling water dam capacity.

The operating costs after the Stage 2 RKEF line becomes fully operational were estimated based on the FS operating cost estimate.  A comparison of the physicals and the economics of the FS and the expansion opportunity are shown Table 2 below.

Table 2 Comparison of physicals and financial KPI’s for the FS case and the Stage 2 Expansion[9]

Item

 

 

Unit

FS Stage 1

Stage 2 – Second Line RKEF Expansion

Base Case (US$14,00/t Ni)

Consensus case (US$16,800/t Ni)

Base Case

 (US$ 14,000/t Ni)

 Consensus case (US$16,800/t Ni)

Physicals

LOM plant feed[10]

Mt

27.3

27.3

44.1

44.1

Process rate

kt/a

900

900

1,800[11]

1,80011

Year 1- 10 Ni grade

%

1.91

1.91

1.82

1.82

LOM Ni grade

%

1.69

1.69

1.53

1.53

LOM Nickel production

kt

426

426

624

624

Strip ratio

w:o

2.1

2.1

1.9

1.9

Mine life

years

28[12]

2812

26[13]

2613

Economics

Pre-production Capital

US$ M

443

443

443

443

LOM Sustaining Capital cost

US$ M

143

143

396

396

Capital Intensity – Initial capex/t Nickel

US$/t Ni

1,041

1,041

710

710

C1 Cost (Brook Hunt)

US$/t Ni

8,193

8,193

7,737

7,737

C1 Cost (Brook Hunt) Years 1- 10

US$/t Ni

6,794

6,794

6,613

6,613

Breakeven (NPV8) Ni price

US$/t

10,766

10,766

10,105

10,105

Total Revenue

US$ M

5,970

7,164

8,742

10,490

Total cost

US$ M

3,811

3,995

5,351

5,617

Operating cash flow

US$ M

2,159

3,169

3,391

4,876

Net cash flow

US$ M

1,572

2,582

2,552

4,033

NPV8

US$ M

401

740

741

1,264

IRR

%

20.1

28.1

23.8

31.8

 

Report Filing                                                                                                                                                     

A technical report on this FS, prepared in accordance with the NI 43-101 reporting requirements, has been filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and at www.horizonteminerals.com

 

Qualified Persons          

Mr Frank Blanchfield, B.Eng, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant, Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;

Mr Andrew Ross, BSc (Hons), MSc, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant, Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;

Mr Francis Roger Billington, BSc (Hons), P.Geo. (APGO), Consultant;

Dr Nicholas Barcza, BSc (Eng.), MSc (Eng.), PhD, Pr.Eng. (ECSA), HLFSAIMM, Metallurgical Engineering Consultant;

Mr. David Haughton, B. Sc, MIMM, C Eng, Senior Process Engineer on behalf of Canadian Engineering Associates Ltd; and

Mr Robin Kalanchey, BASc.(Metals and Materials Engineering), P.Eng., Director, Minerals and Metals Western Canada, Ausenco Engineering Canada Inc (Ausenco);

are the Qualified Persons under NI 43-101, and have reviewed, approved and verified the technical content of this press release, related to their area of expertise.

 

For further information visit www.horizonteminerals.com or contact:

 

Horizonte Minerals plc

Jeremy Martin (CEO)

+44 (0) 203 356 2901

Numis Securities Ltd (NOMAD & Joint Broker)

John Prior

Paul Gillam

+44 (0) 207 260 1000

Shard Capital (Joint Broker)

Damon Heath

Erik Woolgar

+44 (0) 20 186 9952

Tavistock (Financial PR)

Emily Fenton

Gareth Tredway

 

+44 (0) 207 920 3150

 

About Horizonte Minerals:

Horizonte Minerals plc is an AIM and TSX-listed nickel development company focused in Brazil. The Company is developing the Araguaia project, as the next major ferronickel mine in Brazil, and the Vermelho nickel-cobalt project, with the aim of being able to supply nickel and cobalt to the EV battery market. Both projects are 100% owned.

Horizonte shareholders include: Teck Resources Limited, Canaccord Genuity Group, JP Morgan, Lombard Odier Asset Management (Europe) Limited, City Financial, Richard Griffiths and Glencore.

Glossary of technical terms

AACE

Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering

AACE Class 3

+-10% +15% accuracy

Agglomerated

Made into small lumps

Al2O3

Aluminium Oxide

ANN

Araguaia Nickel North (the Northern deposit)

ANS

Araguaia Nickel South (the Southern deposits)

C1

C1 cash cost as defined by Brook Hunt

Calcine

Output from the kiln which is ore that is reduced by heating in the presence of oxygen and coal

Capex

Capital cost

Co

Cobalt

Cut-off grade

Lowest grade of mineralisation material considered economic, used in the calculation of ore resources

Cr2O3

Chromium Oxide

Dilution

Waste or low-grade material accidently mined with the ore

EPC

Engineering Procurement and Construction

EPCM

Engineering Procurement and Construction Management

EV

Electric Vehicles

Fe

Iron

FeNi30

Ferronickel with 30% Nickel and 70% Iron

Ferronickel or FeNi

An alloy that contains approximately 30% nickel and 70% iron and is the produced by the project as an ingot

HZM, Horizonte or the Company

Horizonte Minerals plc

IFC

International Finance Corporation

IRR

Internal Rate of Return

Kt

Thousand Tonnes (metric)

LME

London Metal Exchange

LOM

Life of mine

Loss

Ore that is unintentionally left behind or mined as waste

MgO

Magnesium Oxide

MT

Million Tonnes (metric)

Ni

Nickel

NPV8

Net present value at an 8% discount rate

Opex

Operating cost

Ore

A naturally occurring solid material from which a metal or valuable mineral can be extracted profitably

PEA

Preliminary Economic Assessment

Reverse Circulation Drilling

A rock drilling system that circulates drill cuttings through the centre of the drill rod so that they can be collected and assayed without contamination

RKEF

Rotating Kiln Electric Furnace is the process by which nickel laterite ore is reduced and then melted in so that metal is separated from the slag to produce ferronickel

ROM

Run of mine stockpile

Shotted

Formation of small pellets from molten material

SiO2

Silicon Dioxide

Tpa

Tonnes (metric) per annum

US$

United States Dollar

WM

Wood Mackenzie

Mineral Reserves

Mineral Reserves are sub-divided into 2 categories. The highest level of Reserves or the level with the most confidence is the `Proven’ category and the lower level of confidence of the Reserves is the `Probable’ category. Reserves are distinguished from resources as all of the technical and economic parameters have been applied and the estimated grade and tonnage of the resources should closely approximate the actual results of mining. The guidelines state “Mineral Reserves are inclusive of the diluting material that will be mined in conjunction with the Mineral Reserve and delivered to the treatment plant or equivalent facility.” The guidelines also state that, “The term `Mineral Reserve’ need not necessarily signify that extraction facilities are in place or operative or that all government approvals have been received. It does signify that there are reasonable expectations of such approvals.

 

Proven Mineral Reserves

A `Proven Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction is justified.

 

Probable Mineral Reserves

A `Probable Mineral Reserve’ is the economically mineable part of an Indicated and in some circumstances a Measured Mineral Resource demonstrated by a least a Preliminary Feasibility Study. This study must include adequate information on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic, and other relevant factors that demonstrate, at the time of reporting, that economic extraction can be justified.

 

Minerals Resource

Mineral Resources are sub-divided into 3 categories depending on the geological confidence. The highest level with the most confidence is the `Measured’ category. The next level of confidence is the `Indicated’ category and the lowest level, or the resource with the least confidence, is the `Inferred’ category.

 

Indicated Mineral Resource

An `Indicated Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough for geological and grade continuity to be reasonably assumed.

 

Measured Mineral Resource

A `Measured Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral resource for which quantity, grade or quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics are so well established that they can be estimated with confidence sufficient to allow the appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to support production planning and evaluation of the economic viability of the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing information gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough to confirm both geological and grade continuity.

 

Inferred Mineral Resource

An `Inferred Mineral Resource’ is that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality can be estimated on the basis of geological evidence and limited sampling and reasonably assumed, but not verified, geological and grade continuity. The estimate is based on limited information and sampling, gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes.

 

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION

Except for statements of historical fact relating to the Company, certain information contained in this press release constitutes “forward-looking information” under Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking information includes, but is not limited to, the ability of the Company to complete the Acquisition as described herein, statements with respect to the potential of the Company’s current or future property mineral projects; the success of exploration and mining activities; cost and timing of future exploration, production and development; the estimation of mineral resources and reserves and the ability of the Company to achieve its goals in respect of growing its mineral resources; the ability of the Company to complete the Placing as described herein, and the realization of mineral resource and reserve estimates. Generally, forward-looking information can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variations of such words and phrases or statements that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will be taken”, “occur” or “be achieved”. Forward-looking information is based on the reasonable assumptions, estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, as well as other factors that management believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the date that such statements are made, and are inherently subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including but not limited to risks related to: the inability of the Company to complete the Acquisition as described herein, exploration and mining risks, competition from competitors with greater capital; the Company’s lack of experience with respect to development-stage mining operations; fluctuations in metal prices; uninsured risks; environmental and other regulatory requirements; exploration, mining and other licences; the Company’s future payment obligations; potential disputes with respect to the Company’s title to, and the area of, its mining concessions; the Company’s dependence on its ability to obtain sufficient financing in the future; the Company’s dependence on its relationships with third parties; the Company’s joint ventures; the potential of currency fluctuations and political or economic instability  in countries in which the Company operates; currency exchange fluctuations; the Company’s ability to manage its growth effectively; the trading market for the ordinary shares of the Company; uncertainty with respect to the Company’s plans to continue to develop its operations and new projects; the Company’s dependence on key personnel; possible conflicts of interest of directors and officers of the Company, the inability of the Company to complete the Placing on the terms as described herein, and various risks associated with the legal and regulatory framework within which the Company operates. Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking information, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.


[1] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate

[2] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine

[3] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate

[4] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine

[5] Wood Mackenzie Short term forecast – see market section of NI 43 -101

[6] Source: Glencore

[7] Data from Wood Mackenzie cost curve

[8] Stage 1 only, C1 cash costs as per FS

[9] The physicals and cashflow assessment presented as Stage 2 in the table are preliminary in nature and are based on a mine schedule and an estimate of the additional plant and equipment needed to achieve the additional capacity. The capital costs for the additional plant and equipment are based on the FS costs, and the cost of installation and civil engineering are factored from the FS costs.  Operating costs at the increased capacity are factored based on the FS operating cost estimate.

[10] Includes low grade stockpiles processed at the end of the schedule

[11] Increased process rate commences after year 3

[12] 28 years mining following by 3 years of low grade stockpile processing

[13] 26 years mining followed by 2 years of low grade stockpile processing

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.

Galileo Resources Plc – Holdings in Company

The Company has received a TR-1 which is set out, without amendment, below:

 

 

TR-1: Standard form for notification of major holdings

 

NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR HOLDINGS (to be sent to the relevant issuer and to the FCA in Microsoft Word format if possible)i

1a. Identity of the issuer or the underlying issuer of existing shares to which voting rights are attachedii:

Galileo Resources PLC

 

 

1b. Please indicate if the issuer is a non-UK issuer  (please mark with an “X” if appropriate)

Non-UK issuer

2. Reason for the notification (please mark the appropriate box or boxes with an “X”)

An acquisition or disposal of voting rights

X

An acquisition or disposal of financial instruments

An event changing the breakdown of voting rights

Other (please specify)iii:

3. Details of person subject to the notification obligationiv

Name

Peel Hunt LLP

City and country of registered office (if applicable)

London, United Kingdom

4. Full name of shareholder(s) (if different from 3.)v

Name

City and country of registered office (if applicable)

5. Date on which the threshold was crossed or reachedvi:

07/12/2018

6. Date on which issuer notified (DD/MM/YYYY):

11/12/2018

7. Total positions of person(s) subject to the notification obligation

% of voting rights attached to shares (total of 8. A)

% of voting rights through financial instruments
(total of 8.B 1 + 8.B 2)

Total of both in % (8.A + 8.B)

Total number of voting rights of issuervii

Resulting situation on the date on which threshold was crossed or reached

13.95%

n/a

13.95%

42,489,037

Position of previous notification (if

applicable)

14.04%

 

8. Notified details of the resulting situation on the date on which the threshold was crossed or reachedviii

A: Voting rights attached to shares

Class/type of
shares

ISIN code (if possible)

Number of voting rightsix

% of voting rights

Direct

(Art 9 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.1)

Indirect

(Art 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.2.1)

Direct

(Art 9 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.1)

Indirect

(Art 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC) (DTR5.2.1)

GB00B115T142

42,489,037

n/a

13.95%

n/a

SUBTOTAL 8. A

42,489,037

13.95%

 

 

B 1: Financial Instruments according to Art. 13(1)(a) of Directive 2004/109/EC (DTR5.3.1.1 (a))

Type of financial instrument

Expiration
date
x

Exercise/
Conversion Period
xi

Number of voting rights that may be acquired if the instrument is

exercised/converted.

% of voting rights

n/a

SUBTOTAL 8. B 1

 

 

B 2: Financial Instruments with similar economic effect according to Art. 13(1)(b) of Directive 2004/109/EC (DTR5.3.1.1 (b))

Type of financial instrument

Expiration
date
x

Exercise/
Conversion Period
xi

Physical or cash

settlementxii

Number of voting rights

% of voting rights

n/a

SUBTOTAL 8.B.2

 

 

 

9. Information in relation to the person subject to the notification obligation (please mark the

applicable box with an “X”)

Person subject to the notification obligation is not controlled by any natural person or legal entity and does not control any other undertaking(s) holding directly or indirectly an interest in the (underlying) issuerxiii

x

Full chain of controlled undertakings through which the voting rights and/or the
financial instruments are effectively held starting with the ultimate controlling natural person or legal entity
xiv (please add additional rows as necessary)

Namexv

% of voting rights if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

% of voting rights through financial instruments if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

Total of both if it equals or is higher than the notifiable threshold

n/a

10. In case of proxy voting, please identify:

Name of the proxy holder

n/a

The number and % of voting rights held

n/a

The date until which the voting rights will be held

n/a

11. Additional informationxvi

n/a

Place of completion

London

Date of completion

11/12/2018

 

 

 

You can also follow Galileo on Twitter: @GalileoResource

 

For further information, please contact: Galileo Resources PLC

 

Colin Bird, Chairman

Andrew Sarosi, Executive Director

 

Tel +44 (0) 20 7581 4477

Tel +44 (0) 1752 221937

Beaumont Cornish Limited – Nomad

Roland Cornish/James Biddle

 

Tel +44 (0) 20 7628 3396

Novum Securities Limited – Broker

Colin Rowbury/Jon Belliss

Tel +44 (0) 20 7399 9400

This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.