Ann: AGM Letter to GLN Shareholders, page-52

Hi all,

For what it's worth, I've contacted JP as well to note that further explanation is needed in order for shareholders to make an informed decision on this. I would agree that with ~$60M in the bank we are well capitalised for what lies immediately ahead, which has already been discussed and documented above.

However I would point out I think concerns about 'dilution' as noted on this thread are possibly a bit wayward. Remember, we are still a developer, with a largish capex bill sitting in front of us. At some point as the DFS winds up, bond/bank/debt discussions will have to enter the conversation, but equity raises will play their part, so dilution is part of the game. Yes 50% is significant but if it's a cornerstone deal or involves some sort of strategic partner then perhaps there's more to tell.

As some context (not to cross-promote) but mid this year I bought into Jervois Global (another 'Thematica Funds' play), after they did a massive CR relative to their market cap - dilution to existing holders was 89% (yes, you read that right!). But it was the correct move - they acquired a superb operating cobalt facility in Europe, having just finalised a bond issue to fund the final construction part of their own cobalt mine in Idaho (the only such mine in the US). I waited till after the capital raise to enter, so wasn't affected by the dilution, but regardless - it was the right move in the wider context of what the business is looking to achieve. Like Galan, the institutions backed Jervois, and as part of that huge raise, AustralianSuper upped their stake to 18% and commodity giant Mercuria came onto the register with a 6.4% holding. So the big raise and the 89% dilution was a necessary step in taking Jervois from a mining junior to a mid-tier operator, in my opinion.

Perhaps, with some more explanation, JP and the GLN team might be able to do something similar - but they need to tell us more.

Cheers,
m