email to maredi pl dra, page-7

Brian - sorry for getting on the front foot because we all know nkwe has had its fair share of problems and caused huge angst and frustration amongst shareholders - the announcement is not on of them - please see my comments below (again apologies if they are direct but your comments seem to be taken from chat rooms as opposed to actual facts which have been provided independently by DRA who are considered experts at what they do).

Sent from my iPad

On 17/06/2012, at 11:16 AM, "Brian & Jennifer Thompson" wrote:
Mr Mphahlele



My name is Brian Thompson, I have been a shareholder in NKWE Platinum for 2.5 years. My current shareholding is 650,000 shares, certainly not top 40 but nonetheless deserving of a reply to this email.



The latest BFS report (DFS PROMISED) has caused huge confusion with shareholders. It is ambiguously worded in such a way as to be within an inch of breaching Australian Corporations Law, and certainly within the same inch of breaching ASX ethical reporting rules

Please tell me how - the figures are quoted direct from a final BFS - Further the more pertinent question is what possible rationale nkwe would have in not releasing the bfs as accurately and favourably as possible


At first glance, the BFS report can be read as CapEx $641 million and OpEx as $858 oz. - in effect, a very marginal mine. If you dig deeper into the report it can be interpreted as saying CapEx is $347 million and OpEx is $510 oz. and this equates to the best low cost platinum mine in the world.

A marginal mine ? have you sighted the current opex costs amongst current pgm producers in south Africa operating on the bushveld - the proposed opex would be in the lowest quartile (yes at 858 all in you are a genuine low cost producer) - I have no idea as to where or how you get 347 and 510 - they aren't in the bfs and they aren't in the announcement

On close scrutiny, the $858 oz OpEx has a $347 million of CapEx in it. How can this OpEx be reported as such? Under Australian accountancy standards, CapEx cannot be counted in OpEx unless you are leasing the capital expenditure or borrowing the money on that capital, and showing the borrowing cost. Even then, you could only show a yearly cost, not the whole CapEx accumulative leasing or borrowing cost in one figure. Does this indicate that NKWE intends going it alone and leasing the equipment? There is also no excuse for using the $858 figure and a reduced margin to calculate IRR on the debt. It is double dipping and a kindergarten mistake.

Clearly your kindergarten was better than ours and dras - fixed cost is not capex and last I checked the australian accounting standards dont put bankable feasibility studies together - we will be putting together a financial sensitivity and key assumptions release - it is with dra for their sign off (as the first release was) to ensure we aren't misleading anyone and only reporting what they have consented to and prepared

The current share price of 12.5c illustrates how much confusion this BFS report has caused. The price should be 32c and awaiting a JV report.

Would love it be - have you actually seen what world pgm stocks. (and prices) have done over the last 6 months - hundreds of shareholders have very legitimate reasons to exit nkwe (Anglo claims, time delays, tubatse challenge, euro zone about to be obliterated ) - the bfs release and the fact that dra put 3m in and took stock is not one of them

In the best interests of shareholders and to protect Directors from any suggestion of obfuscation of the true value of the resource, particularly as there has been controlled robotic capping trading in the days leading up to the announcement and the sudden confusion after, an immediate Q&A report should be released to ASX addressing the concerns stated above.

As alluded to above we are in the process of getting dra to consent to release further information which backs up and elaborates on what was released last week - in the interim why don't you send me your calculations on how you get cap ex at 347m and opex of 510/oz

Brian - again - what possible reason would we have other than to show the bfs results in he best possible light - 90% of responses have been positive with the proviso that the forthcoming jv announcement is where shareholders will see and understand what the true value of nkwe could be moving forward


Yours faithfully



Brian Thompson

B & J Thompson Holdings Pty Ltd



Copies to Peter Landau, NKWE Perth

DRA Mining Consultants, SA