Media, page-12

that valuation is considerbly lower than what PEK have said.

THey are suggesting "We derive a risked valuation of $0.18/share for PEK (prior $0.07/share). Our valuation is
underpinned by NPV10DCF of $509M for the Ngualla Project and Teesside Refinery. We have an
updated risk weight of 80% (prior 75%) to reflect the progress in theaward of the SML and
resolution of the Appian royaltyas the company works through its financing and offtake. Our
unrisked valuation is $672M or $0.22/share for PEK"

PEK's previous BFS which means the update should be better not worse, had the NPV at



And this was at lower REE and less Geo-political risks. THe update to BFS should only make this better, otherwise whats the point? I expect cost will be lower, price assumptions the same and througput higher.

Perhaps fosters would have looked silly pushing us down to 9c then giving a target of 3x., so they set it to 2x so it looks like 9c was fair value. BS, whole thing was manpulated down.. But no point complaining as we all had opportunities to get in sub 9c, blue skies from here unless markets tank!