For those of you who are wondering about Thomas's Diatribe on REO
Their Text in itallic
My responses to their statements in Bold.The Tiring Pensana
Pensanasuggestedill intent on our part and that we would be investing against them.
Clearlythey are right, Since Pensana dumped Great Wall, REO have constantlybeen publishing Unfounded Unsubstantiated Innuendo, or FUD about theCompany and its Projects. That REO's parent Organisation is in itselfruns a rare earth trading operation, you clearly have a vestedinterest while you are obtaining your supplies from a Chinese SOIprovider; A simple fact that destroys all of Thomas's / Jenny'scredibility
Baringrelevant disclosure from the company, whether it concernsfeasibility, ESG planning, resource data, or anything else for thatmatter, the company must accept scrutiny and that public availableopen-source data form the narrative about Pensana.
Sobeing a Marketer of Chinese RE products yourself, where is your ESGDisclosure and what is happening in Myanmar, Where “Illegal”Chinese miners who have crossed the Border are being protected by thePLA while they rape and pollute their neighbours Resources ? How muchMyanmar RE's are there in the Products you are selling ?
Andbased on that narrative, as far as we are concerned, there is nosingle aspect to suggest that Pensana should be an investment case.Consequently, we never have considered and never will consider aninvestment in Pensana, long or short.
Great,the last thing Pensana needs is a Chinese influence, You can stopTrading aswell.
Pensana’sESG Take Backseat? Thatis not to say, that Pensana don’t have an ESG policy anymore
Thelink to Pensana’s actual ESG policy contents, before and after,remains at a lessprominent locationof the company’s web presence.
Thatis called Critical Path planning, It is logical to first find themine, then raise the finance, before building the Mine and ProcessPlant. ESG for most Companies does not normally kick in untilconstruction starts, We note however that Pensana's managementactually started addressing ESG at least three years ago and hasbeen quietly putting in place the systems which will enable them tobe Pro-Active in developing and maintaining a 'Sustainable'environment.
Pensana Bond Financing
NowPensana target bond financing for US$250 mio over 5 years:
Updateon site development, Financing and Investor Webinar
Pensanahas engaged ABG Sundal Collier (ABGSC), a leading Nordic investmentbank headquartered in Oslo, Norway, to progress the debt financing..The envisaged senior debt facilities under discussion comprise asenior secured first lien facility amount of up to US$250 millionover a five-year term.
Areader and valuable contributor of our humble blog, who has knowledgeof this particular market, comments:
Undisclosed source who's onlycredential is that he can read and write insults !
TheNorwegian bond market is for cowboys, anything goes. Itis tiring, but lets sum it up:
Pensana’s Longonjo project is located in Angola;
State the Obvious why not ? It does not make anything that follows any more credible.
Angola is No. 142 on Transparency International’s 2020 Corruption Perception Index of 180 countries, an improvement of 4 over 2019, nonetheless, somewhat closer to the bottom than to the top;
Which is one of the better scores in Africa, It is also equal with PNG where Australian / US Mining Companies are happy to do business ! Also note that it is improving, and only just this year Angola has been recognised by the USA/EU as now having an functional Legal system, and Banking System
The main shareholder of Pensana is “ASF Africa Mining LLP”, the wealth management fund of the national Fundo Soberano de Angola (FSDEA). As we reported on October 20, 2020, ASF was previously known as “Quantum Global”, allegedly the money laundering machine of Angola’s previous president Dos Santos;
Yeswe know the Previous Management was corrupt, The De Santos family are successfully being pursued in various EU/US jurisdictions.
There is no indication, that Angola so far has lived up to its commitments under the Protocol Additional to the Agreement between the Republic of Angola and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Application of Safeguards in Connection with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons;
Note: That Angola is a Member of the IAEA, which is concerned with preventing the spead of Nuclear Technology, There is NO indication that they have NOT lived up to their Obligations,
This is relevant, because Pensana’s Longonjo, as per public available data, could be a “hot deposit” with high levels of radioactive thorium;
“Couldbe”....No facts just innuendo !
In its former incarnation “Rift Valley Resources” Pensana released some preliminary data on the thorium and uranium contents of Longonjo, which indicate that the quantity limits for thorium under a.m. IAEA protocol could be exceeded by as much as 50 times eachyear, should Longonjo ever go into production in accordance with the quantities Pensana plan;
Angola is a Signatory andMember of the IEAE, and as such will require Pensana to comply withany “applicable” provisions However much of the Regulatoryframework is concerned with the Transport of materials and theDevelopment of Nuclear Technology (Reactors, Bombs etc) , ClearlyAngola does neither !
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/svs22_web.pdf
Pensana steadfastly ignore repeated requests to elease relevant thorium and uranium data from the analysis of the Longonjo drill core samples, all of which have been tested for thorium and uranium contents;
And why should they ? There isno legal requirement to provide the General Public with anyinformation, especially when such information can be considered asbeing commercially sensitive. Which it is as evidenced by REO's,LYC's and PEK's desire and willingness to use it against the Company
Pensana are adament, that they will ship only raw material to the Yorkshire refinery, that will contain no radionuclides, refering to technology developed by Wood Group. This suggests, that the thorium concentrate should remain in Angola;
Duh Stating the obvious,
That could be a problem, as in terms of nuclear proliferation a large stock of thorium concentrate is just that, a problem; (Up until the early 1960s the USSR based its nuclear weapons technology on thorium. Nowadays the relevant know-how is available on the internet. That is, why IAEA are to police such materials);
Who/ Where does anybody say that there is going to be a large Stock ofThorium, as far as has been said so far, “The Thorium will be mixedback in with the Tailings” ie returned to the concentration fromwhich it started out at.
Pensana ignore requests to disclose, how Wood Group would achieve the 100% removal of radionuclides from the Longonjo resource and what the impact of that process could be on the rare earth content;
Again Propriety Information andcertainly commercially sensitive
Relevant reseach suggests, that agressive removal of thorium from a rare earth resource, broadly similar and within the range ofLongonjo’s, may lower TREO content by ~80%, while removing ~90% of thorium, not 100%;
Not Relevant, as what you referto is old Technology, Your previous statement acknowledges that youhave no idea as to what Process Pensana will be using.
The feasibility study is kept under lock, contents of which could give an indication, what should be the solution to the radioactive waste problem, what it costs and what is the ESG planning under Pensana’s uncompromising ESG policy;
And with People / Entitieslike you around I hope the Lock is a good one,
Instead of contents of the feasibility study, Pensana offered investors a “financial summary”, which does not hold water, when compared to the published data of Pensana’s preliminary feasibility study, while certainly more concrete contents of the bankable feasibility study remain unreleased;
See my previous comment, Ofcourse the Business Plan and PFS are different, The PFS was producedwhile PM8 were still considering the option of being ripped off byGreat Wall; after seeing the light they decided to improve the Planby going to Saltend..
The commercial impact of the Angolan 25% tax on revenue as well as royalty of 2% kicking in after year 2 of operation on Pensana’s feasibility has also not been discussed or disclosed separately, but is surely contained in the undisclosed details of the bankable feasibility study.
Idiot, What BankableFeasibility Study ?, I though you said it does not exist, and yet inyour last two statement you imply that it does !! Obviously you arereferring to the one that they presented to ABGSC ?. Which we canassume shows that the financials of the Project are so strong thatPensana does not need to coerce Angola into reducing the Tax regimeand is proud to be providing a Win – Win solution.
So,where does the Norwegian “cowboy market” come in?
EURegulation
Bylaw,EU Regulation 2019/2088, applicable since March 10, 2021, the EUcompels professional investors and financial advisors to disclose,in quite some detail, how the risks of negativeenvironmental, social and governance (ESG) impactsmay affect the value of the investment.
Suppose an entirely fictionalsomeone would want to avoid such scrutiny, he would probably look forfinancing from “cowboy markets”, as long as EU-affiliated nationsgoverning such markets haven’t adopted contents the EU Regulation2019/2088 for their own regulations.
Ofcourse, Pensana’s post-EU regulation announced bond financeintention in the Norwegian market is purelycoincidentaland serves exclusively to take advantage of a particularly vibrantbond market outside EU jurisdiction.
Whata load of Twaddle, That argument is based on a false / unfoundedsurmise that Pensana will not be ESG Complaint. It is also highlyinsulting to Norway who are probably one of the most “Environmentallyconscious” countries in the World.
AsI stated earlier, REO's continual promotion of mythical reason as towhy the World should abandon all efforts to develop an IndependentRare Earths capability free from the Chinese Monopoly has becometotally transparent. Why they even bother now that Xi has stated hiswillingness to Weaponize the subject. But more importantly there isnow a clear realisation that even if it wanted to Chinajust does not have the capacityto supply the coming demand curve.
Lastlyas these propogandists point out ESG Regulation is going to make Chinese REProducts VERY expensive in the EU, Talk about shooting your Master inthe foot !
