Breaking
Secure Stock Strategies
Author

admin

Browsing
Investing

Rio Tinto and Glencore Walk Away from Mega-Merger, but Mining M&A Marches On

The collapse of merger talks between Rio Tinto (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO) and Glencore (LSE:GLEN,OTCPL:GLCNF) has ended what would have been the mining industry’s largest-ever deal.

The two companies confirmed last week that discussions over a potential US$260 billion combination have been abandoned after they failed to agree on terms that would deliver shareholder value. The deal, revived late last year, would have created the world’s largest diversified miner with dominant positions in copper, iron ore, lithium and cobalt.

Rio Tinto said it is no longer considering a merger or other business combination with Glencore after determining it could not reach an agreement that meets its shareholder objectives.

Glencore, for its part, said the proposed terms significantly undervalued its contribution to a combined group, particularly its copper portfolio and growth pipeline. Shares of Glencore fell sharply following the announcement, briefly dropping more than 10 percent in London trading, while Rio Tinto shares also declined.

Under UK takeover rules, Rio Tinto is now barred from making another approach for six months unless granted special permission. The breakdown marks at least the third failed attempt to combine the two mining giants over the past two decades — talks were previously explored in 2008 and again in 2014, with another round briefly surfacing in 2024.

This latest effort gained momentum amid a broader wave of consolidation driven by long-term expectations of copper shortages tied to electrification, artificial intelligence infrastructure and energy transition spending.

A combined Rio Tinto-Glencore would have reshaped the global mining landscape, pairing Rio Tinto’s operational scale and project development expertise with Glencore’s trading arm and exposure to copper and cobalt.

Despite the failed mega-merger, dealmaking across the mining sector has continued at pace in early 2026, reflecting sustained pressure on producers to replenish reserves and secure long-life assets.

In January, Zijin Gold International (HKEX:2259,OTCPL:ZJNGF) agreed to acquire Allied Gold (TSX:AAUC,NYSE:AAUC) in an all-cash transaction valued at roughly US$4 billion. The deal gives Zijin expanded exposure to gold assets in Ethiopia, Mali and Côte d’Ivoire, fitting its strategy of international expansion through large-scale, long-life projects.

Elsewhere, Eldorado Gold (TSX:ELD,NYSE:EGO) and Foran Mining (TSX:FOM,OTCQX:FMCXF) agreed to combine in a share-based transaction that will create a larger gold and copper producer with two development projects scheduled to enter production in 2026. The deal brings together Eldorado’s Skouries project in Greece and Foran’s McIlvenna Bay project in Saskatchewan, with the combined group targeting output of roughly 900,000 gold equivalent ounces by 2027.

Glencore itself has remained active on the divestment side.

In Australia, Austral Resources Australia (ASX:AR1) agreed to acquire the Lady Loretta copper mine from Glencore, marking another step in the Swiss-based miner’s ongoing portfolio optimization. The transaction includes a royalty structure and allows Glencore to retain some upside exposure while exiting a non-core asset.

Rare earths have also featured prominently in this year’s deal flow. Energy Fuels (TSX:EFR,NYSEAMERICAN:UUUU) moved to acquire Australian Strategic Materials (ASX:ASM,OTCPL:ASMMF), a transaction aimed at creating a vertically integrated rare earths producer spanning mining, processing and alloy production.

The deal includes Australian Strategic’s Dubbo project in Australia and its Korean metals plant.

Analysts say the failure of the Rio Tinto-Glencore talks does little to dampen the broader consolidation narrative. Copper remains a central focus among producers as long-term supply deficits are widely forecast despite recent price volatility.

Lithium, rare earths and other critical minerals are also attracting sustained interest as governments and manufacturers seek to secure non-Chinese supply chains.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Kinetiko Energy

Investor Insight

Kinetiko Energy is advancing a large-scale, shallow onshore gas project in South Africa, targeting near-term CNG/LNG production to strategically supply a domestic market facing a critical energy shortfall. The company’s growth strategy is supported by reported significant contingent resources, pilot project gas reserves, strong gas flow results and a JV funded development pathway.

[The company’s corporate video can be viewed on its website at www.kinetiko.com.au]

Overview

Kinetiko Energy (ASX:KKO) is an onshore gas exploration and development company focused on commercialising shallow conventional gas resources in South Africa’s Mpumalanga Province. The company’s exploration rights are located near ageing coal-fired power stations and established energy infrastructure, positioning Kinetiko to supply gas into a domestic market experiencing chronic power shortages and seeking cleaner, reliable alternatives to coal-based power generation.

Location of the company’s exploration rights adjacent to energy infrastructure

The company has achieved maiden gas reserves with positive economics and has reported 6 Tcf of 2C contingent resources, establishing a substantial onshore gas project with significant scale potential. Kinetiko is progressing a staged development strategy through Project Alpha, supported by a binding Joint Development Agreement with FFS Refiners. Management brings a combination of deep local operating experience, capital markets expertise and decades of energy and infrastructure experience, underpinning Kinetiko’s transition from explorer to gas producer.

Milestones and Growth

100 % EXPLORATION SUCCESS

All 50 wells have successfully encountered gas with large, shallow pay zones, suggesting uniform geology throughout entire tenement package

RESOURCE & RESERVE

Reserve totals 6.4 BCF (2P) assessed over Brakfontein pilot confirms positive economics. Reserve calculated over only 0.2 percent of granted tenements (Sproule B.V. certified)

RESOURCE GROWTH

Anticipated to increase following flow testing program and grant of ER383 (2,383 sq km), increasing project life and value. Further drilling is expected to upgrade 5.8 TCF 2U Prospective Resource into 2C Resource

MULTI-SITE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL

Large tenement holding overlapping key energy infrastructure, allowing multiple gas field developments for multiple public and private customers which improves investor returns/value

DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIPS

Agreements in place with the Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa and FFS Refiners to co-fund and develop pilot plant and scale to full commercial production.

Company Highlights

  • Advancing a world-class onshore gas project with 6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of 2C contingent resources and maiden gas reserves with positive economics
  • Strong extended flow test results from production test wells at Brakfontein, with methane purity exceeding 98.5 percent
  • Additional exploration acreage to grow current contingent resources and reserves
  • Binding Joint Development Agreement with FFS Refiners to co-develop a staged LNG project, starting with a 5,000-tonne-per-annum (tpa) pilot plant
  • Located in South Africa’s primary power-producing region, close to existing infrastructure and major demand centres
  • Clear pathway from exploration to production, supported by recent funding, reserve certification work and production right applications

Key Project

Brakfontein Gas Project

The Brakfontein gas project is Kinetiko Energy’s most developed gas field in South Africa. Located in Mpumalanga Province, Brakfontein comprises a cluster of seven shallow conventional gas wells positioned near existing energy infrastructure and major centres of power demand.

Recent extended flow testing at Brakfontein has delivered strong results from two production test wells, 271-KA03PT06 and 271-KA03PT10, which together produced nearly 8 million cubic feet of gas during sustained testing. Well 271-KA03PT06 produced 4,432 Mscf over 27 days at an average rate of 164 Mscfd, while 271-KA03PT10 produced 3,522 Mscf over 40 days at an average rate of 91 Mscfd. Gas produced from both wells recorded methane purity exceeding 98.5 percent, supporting the project’s commercial development potential.

Development of Brakfontein is being advanced under Project Alpha, a staged framework established through a binding Joint Development Agreement (JDA) with FFS Refiners a leading South African hydrocarbon solutions provider. Phase 1a focuses on gas field development activities, including the co-funded drilling of additional production wells, upgrades to existing wells, further gas testing, appointment of a competent person for certification of gas reserves, preparation of an LNG business case and submission of a production right application. Kinetiko is the operator for this phase.

Subject to Phase 1a outcomes, Phase 1b is designed to take into production a 5,000 tpa micro-LNG pilot plant, situated at the Brakfontein gas field. The pilot plant would be developed through a 50/50 special purpose vehicle between Kinetiko and FFS Refiners, with responsibility for LNG production, marketing and distribution.

Beyond the pilot phase, Project Alpha provides a structured pathway for scaling LNG production from the same Brakfontein asset. Phase 2 contemplates expanding liquefaction capacity to approximately 25,000 tpa, while Phase 3 envisages further expansion across additional Kinetiko tenement areas, with potential LNG capacity increasing up to 125,000 tpa, subject to technical, regulatory and commercial outcomes.

Management Team

Adam Sierakowski – Executive Chairman

Adam Sierakowski is a corporate lawyer and founding director of the legal firm Palisade Corporate. He is the managing director and founder of Trident Capital, where, for over 20 years he has used his vast corporate legal experience consulting and advising on a range of transactions to a variety of large private and listed public entities. He has advised and guided many companies undertaking IPO, RTO, fundraising and M&A activities in Australia and overseas.

Sierakowski was the inaugural non-executive chairman of the Company from 2010 and became executive chairman in January 2021. He also holds director positions in several ASX listed companies.

Rob Bulder – Interim CEO; Non-executive Director

Rob Bulder is a qualified chartered accountant with over 30 years of commercial experience. Bulder has held numerous senior management and executive board positions in the manufacturing, financial services, IT, airline and gas industries, overseeing multi billion Rand budgets. These positions included that of Group Financial Director of Paragon Business Communications Ltd, a company listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange, as well as the position of (acting) Executive Vice-President of South African Airways SOE and CEO of South African Airways Technical Division (Pty) Ltd, a multi-billion Rand division of SAA Ltd and that of the Vice President of Business Development for SAA LtRob is a qualified

Don Ncube – Non-executive Director

Donald Ncube has a master’s degree in Manpower Studies from the University of Manchester.

Ncube is recognised and respected as one of the reputable pioneers of Black Economic Empowerment. He is the founder and former chairman and chief executive officer of Real Africa Holdings (Pty) Ltd, a listed company on the JSE.

Ncube carved his professional career in the mining industry. He worked for the Anglo-American Corporation for 22 consecutive years and was the first South African black to sit on the Board of Anglo-American Corporation. Ncube has a performance track record as Chairman of successful corporations such as Sun International, Oceana Fishing Group, South African Airways and Atomic Energy Corporation.

Don Ncube, together with Brian Hughes (Reservoir Engineer) and Paul Tromp Petroleum Geologist) founded Badimo Gas (Pty) Ltd, which applied and obtained gas exploration rights from the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy in South Africa. Ncube is the executive chairman of Afro Energy (Pty) Ltd, which currently holds the exploration rights and is 100 percent owned by Kinetiko Energy.

Mxolisi Donald Mbuyisa Mgojo – Non-executive Director

Mxolisi Mgojo has been in the mining industry since 2001. Prior to that, his career includes 10 years as a software engineer and 8 years in the finance industry, including Societé Generale Investment Banking.

Mgojo worked for Exxaro Resources since its inception in 2006, heading the Base Metals and Industrial Minerals business before being appointed as the executive head of coal in August 2008. In May 2015, Mgojo was appointed as CEO Designate and took over the reins from Sipho Nkosi as chief executive officer on 1 April 2016, a position he held until his retirement in July 2022.

Mgojo was the President of the Minerals Council South Africa from 24 May 2017 until 26 May 2021 and has been serving on the Board of the Minerals Council since 2015 and the Collieries Committee of the Council before becoming a board member. Mxolisi joined the Business Leadership South Africa board on 1 April 2020 and resigned on 1 July 2022. On 26 January 2024 Mxolisi was appointed President of Business Unity South Africa. From November 2024 to November 2025, he is serving as the B20 South Africa Co-Chair.

On 27 May 2017, Mgojo received the Paul Harris Award from the Hatfield Branch of the Rotary Foundation. In November 2019, he was named a finalist in the Master Category of the 2019 Ernst & Young World Entrepreneur of the Year Awards for Southern Africa. On 3 June 2022, Mgojo was awarded the All Africa Business Leaders Award, 2022 Business Leader of the Year, honouring his four-decade-long multi-continental career in business that has seen him work as a software engineer, a banker, and for the last 21 years, in the resources area. On 4 October 2022, Mgojo was inaugurated into the SA Mining Hall of Fame at the Joburg Indaba for his exceptional leadership in the South African Mining Industry

Robert Scharnell – Non-executive Director

Robert Scharnell is an experienced international business executive with over 30 years of demonstrated achievement at Chevron Corporation in establishing and implementing business strategy. He has conducted business in over 20 countries and under complex situations, for large values including negotiating multi-lingual agreements, sales/purchase transactions, and settling claims and disputes on the scale of over $1 billion in value.

His breadth of experience extends beyond the core energy business, with a career highlight in managing the creation and implementation of an award-winning economic development and social impact project in Africa. This project transformed Chevron’s approach to improving lives within the communities in which it operates.

Paul Doropoulos – Chief Financial Officer

Paul Doropoulos has approximately 25 years of combined experience in an executive consultant capacity to ASX-listed companies in the energy, minerals, mining services and media sectors. Time during this period was spent as both an executive and non-executive director of ASX companies. Further, v has extensive experience in the hospitality and associated industries. Doropoulos was directly involved in the successful ASX listings of Kinetiko Energy Limited in 2011. In addition,

Doropoulos holds a Bachelor of Business Degree with a Finance Maths minor

Richard Wolanski – Corporate Finance

Richard Wolanski, B.Com, ACA, is a Chartered Accountant with qualifications that include a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of Western Australia. Wolanski has over 30 years professional experience in the finance and mining industries at an international level. He has provided corporate, strategic and financial advisory assistance to public companies in Australia, Singapore and the United Kingdom.

Hendrik Burger Jr – Operations Manager

Hendrik Burger, or “Junior”, as he is known to our team, has been with Kinetiko from the start of test well operations in 2012. He has maintained continuity for the project with the local communities and, since 2012, has resided in Amersfoort, the hub of the project.

Burger is the site foreman and is responsible for the day-to-day maintenance and operations of our total project in the field. From equipment fabrication to farmer relations, Burger is our man on the ground. He is a trusted and reliable member of Kinetiko’s South African team. He has also been part of the well testing team since 2012. Junior never says he can’t do something, no matter how difficult, he finds a way. He is the best-known face of Kinetiko in the field, and sensitive to the Afrikaans and African cultures, which are so important on the ground in South Africa.

His technical skills include: Heavy equipment manufacturing, mechanical, electrical, hydraulics, welding (CO2, stick welding, TIG welding), plasma cutting, cutting & grinding, HDPE welding, TLB operation, borehole cementation, heavy-duty driver’s license, PDP license, advanced drone photography, fluent in Afrikaans and English, conversational Zulu.

Field experience includes oilfield chemicals, casing and full cementation solutions, core and well drilling, well testing as well as responsibility for our operational SHEQ obligations.

.

Simon Whybrow – Company Secretary

Simon Whybrow is a highly driven and dedicated professional with a wealth of experience as a CFO, company secretary, and commercial manager. His key strengths lie in financial administration and control, boardroom practices, corporate and business strategy, process improvement, and general management. Whybrow also specialises in overseeing financial operations and ensuring effective administrative processes. His expertise extends to implementing sound corporate governance practices and contributing to strategic decision-making.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Kinetiko Energy: Developing South Africa’s Largest Onshore Natural Gas Resource Solution

Kinetiko Energy (ASX:KKO) is an onshore gas exploration and development company targeting the commercialisation of shallow conventional gas resources in South Africa’s Mpumalanga Province. Its exploration assets are strategically located near ageing coal-fired power stations and existing energy infrastructure, enabling Kinetiko to deliver gas to a domestic market grappling with persistent power shortages and seeking cleaner, more reliable alternatives to coal-based electricity.

The company has secured its first gas reserves with strong economic potential and has announced 6 Tcf of 2C contingent resources, creating a substantial onshore gas project with considerable growth potential. Kinetiko is advancing a phased development plan through Project Alpha, supported by a binding Joint Development Agreement with FFS Refiners. The management team combines extensive local operational knowledge, capital markets expertise, and decades of experience in energy and infrastructure, positioning Kinetiko to transition from explorer to gas producer.

Location of the company’s exploration rights adjacent to energy infrastructure

The Brakfontein gas project is Kinetiko Energy’s most advanced gas field in South Africa. Situated in Mpumalanga Province, it consists of a cluster of seven shallow conventional gas wells strategically located near existing energy infrastructure and key power demand centres.

Company Highlights

  • Advancing a world-class onshore gas project with 6 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of 2C contingent resources and maiden gas reserves with positive economics
  • Strong extended flow test results from production test wells at Brakfontein, with methane purity exceeding 98.5 percent
  • Additional exploration acreage to grow current contingent resources and reserves
  • Binding Joint Development Agreement with FFS Refiners to co-develop a staged LNG project, starting with a 5,000-tonne-per-annum (tpa) pilot plant
  • Located in South Africa’s primary power-producing region, close to existing infrastructure and major demand centres
  • Clear pathway from exploration to production, supported by recent funding, reserve certification work and production right applications

This Kinetiko Energy profile is part of a paid investor education campaign.*

Click here to connect with Kinetiko Energy (ASX:KKO) to receive an Investor Presentation

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Valeura Energy Inc. Announces Record 2P Reserves, Higher Reserves Life Index

CALGARY, AB / ACCESS Newswire / February 10, 2026 / Valeura Energy Inc. (TSX:VLE,OTC:VLERF)(OTCQX:VLERF) (‘Valeura’ or the ‘Company’) announces record high proved plus probable (‘2P’) reserves, an increase in its 2P reserves life index (‘RLI’), and a third consecutive year of approximately 200% 2P reserves replacement ratio.

Highlights

  • Record high proved (‘1P’) reserves of 37.9 MMbbls, proved plus probable (‘2P’) reserves of 57.8 MMbbls, and proved plus probable plus possible (‘3P’) reserves of 71.2 MMbbls;

  • Adding, not just replacing reserves, with a 2P reserves replacement ratio of 192%;

  • 2P reserves net present value (‘NPV 10 ‘) before tax of US$872 million and US$692 million on an after tax basis (1) ;

  • Year-end 2025 cash position of US$306 million, and a net asset value (‘NAV’) of US$998 million, equating to approximately C$13 per common share (2) ;

  • RLI increased to a new record of 7.5 years, on a 2P basis (3) ; and

  • Above volumes and values do not include the recent farm-in to blocks G1/65 and G3/65 in the Gulf of Thailand, which will be additive upon completion (4) (the ‘Farm-in Transaction’).

(1) Discounted at 10% (‘NPV 10 ‘)
(2) 2P NPV 10 after tax plus cash of US$305.7 million (no debt), using US$/C$ exchange rate of 1.3722 and 105.5 million common shares of the Company (the ‘Common Shares’) outstanding, as at 31 December 2025
(3) Based on 2P reserves divided by the mid-point of the Company’s 2026 guidance production of 21 Mbbls/d
(4) Subject to government approval

Dr. Sean Guest, President and CEO commented:

‘For the third time in a row we have added approximately double the reserves we produced during the year, achieving a 2P reserves replacement ratio of 192%. This outcome is especially strong given the sharp drop in oil prices in 2025, meaning our reserves were evaluated at a forward price much lower than in the prior year.

We are committed to seeing through the volatility in the global commodity market and have maintained our focus on adding to the ultimate potential and longevity of our portfolio. This is reflected in an improvement to our RLI, which is now at a new record high of 7.5 years (based on 2P reserves and anticipated 2026 production). Our RLI has increased steadily over the three years we have been operating in Thailand, and we see this as affirmation of our ability to add more years of future cash flow, for the benefit of all stakeholders.

The net asset value of our business, defined as year-end cash plus our 2P net revenue (NPV 10 ), is US$1 billion which equates to approximately C$13/Common Share.

We are mindful of the concept of portfolio renewal and therefore continue to focus on contingent resources as well, which provides the feedstock for future reserves additions. We believe our decision to redevelop the Wassana field is an excellent example of this progression. At the same time, we have added more volumes through life-extending work with our Jasmine licence and through ongoing drilling success across the portfolio. In addition, upon completion of our strategic Farm-in Transaction to blocks G1/65 and G3/65 in the Gulf of Thailand, these new volumes will be additive to the volumes we have reported today.

We believe our year-end 2025 reserves and resources demonstrate our ability to drive deeper and longer-lived value from our assets, even when faced with a correction in commodity prices. I believe this underscores both the robustness of our portfolio and the relentless commitment to value shared by our world class team.’

Independent Reserves and Resources Evaluation

Valeura commissioned Netherland, Sewell & Associates, Inc. (‘NSAI’) to assess reserves and resources for all of its Thailand assets as of 31 December 2025. NSAI’s evaluation is presented in a report dated 09 February 2026 (the ‘NSAI 2025 Report’). This follows previous evaluations conducted by NSAI for the previous three years ended 31 December 2024 (the ‘NSAI 2024 Report’), 31 December 2023 (the ‘NSAI 2023 Report’), and 31 December 2022.

NSAI 2025 Report: Oil and Gas Reserves by Field Based on Forecast Prices and Costs

Reserves by Field

Gross (Before Royalties) Reserves, Working Interest Share (Mbbls)

Jasmine (Light/Med.)

Manora (Light/Med.)

Nong Yao (Light/Med.)

Wassana (Heavy)

Total

Proved

Producing Developed

6,465

1,557

4,751

1,319

14,091

Non-Producing Developed

1,413

77

153

432

2,074

Undeveloped

3,301

842

3,823

13,753

21,719

Total Proved (1P)

11,179

2,476

8,726

15,504

37,884

Total Probable (P2)

10,032

469

5,193

4,201

19,896

Total Proved + Probable (2P)

21,211

2,945

13,919

19,705

57,780

Total Possible (P3)

6,295

475

4,120

2,569

13,459

Total Proved + Probable + Possible (3P)

27,506

3,420

18,039

22,274

71,238

Summary of Reserves Replacement, Value, and Field Life

Valeura added volumes within the 1P, 2P, and 3P categories in 2025. As compared to the NSAI 2024 Report, the NSAI 2025 Report indicates an increase of 5.6 MMbbls of proved (1P) reserves and 7.8 MMbbls of proved plus probable (2P) reserves, after having produced 8.5 MMbbls of oil in 2025. This implies a 1P reserves replacement ratio of 166% and a 2P reserves replacement ratio of 192%. 2025 was the Company’s third consecutive year of recording new reserves additions well in excess of volumes produced. The Company’s reserves replacement ratio on a 2P basis was 245% in 2024 and 218% in 2023.

Valeura’s RLI has increased for a third year in a row. Based on the mid-point of the Company’s 2026 production guidance of 19.5 – 22.5 Mbbls/d (21.0 Mbbls/d), on a 2P reserves basis as of 31 December 2025, the Company estimates its RLI to be approximately 7.5 years. This represents an increase from the Company’s RLI of 5.6 years as at 31 December 2024 and 4.5 years as at 31 December 2023 (calculated on the same basis).

While the 2025 2P reserves increased relative to 2024, the revenue and NPV 10 associated with these reserves is slightly lower than 2024. This reduction in value is driven by the significant drop in benchmark oil prices in 2025, causing NSAI to use a much lower oil price forecast in their year-end 2025 evaluation. The Company estimates that, based on the 2P net present value of estimated future revenue after income taxes in the NSAI 2025 Report (based on a 10% discount rate), plus the Company’s 2025 year-end cash position of US$305.7 million, the Company has a 2P NAV of US$997.7 million. Using the year-end count of Common Shares outstanding (being 105,535,429 Common Shares) and 31 December 2025 foreign currency exchange rates (which reflects a stronger Canadian dollar), Valeura’s NAV equates to approximately C$13/Common Share.

NAV Estimate

1P NPV 10

2P NPV 10

3P NPV 10

Before Tax

After Tax

Before Tax

After Tax

Before Tax

After Tax

NPV 10 (US$ million)

401.1

370.6

871.9

692.0

1,304.6

947.9

Cash at 31 December 2025 (US$ million) (1)

305.7

305.7

305.7

305.7

305.7

305.7

Net Asset Value (US$ million)

706.8

676.3

1,177.6

997.7

1,610.3

1,253.6

Common shares (million) (2)

105.5

105.5

105.5

105.5

105.5

105.5

Estimated NAV per basic share (C$ per share) (3)

9.2

8.8

15.3

13.0

20.9

16.3

(1) Cash at 31 December 2025 of US$305.7 million
(2) Issued and outstanding Common Shares as at 31 December 2025
(3) US$/C$ exchange rate of 1.3722 at 31 December 2025

The NSAI 2025 Report indicates a further extension in the anticipated end of field life for the Jasmine, Wassana and Manora fields, and a slight reduction in the anticipated end of field life for the Nong Yao field.

Fields

Gross (Before Royalties) 2P Reserves,
Working Interest Share

End of Field Life

2P NPV10 After Tax
(US$ million)

31 December 2024 (MMbbls)

2025 Production (MMbbls)

Additions (MMbbls)

31 December 2025 (MMbbls)

Reserves Replacement Ratio (%)

NSAI 2024 Report

NSAI 2025 Report

31 December 2024

31 December 2025

Jasmine

16.8

(3.0)

7.4

21.2

249%

Aug-31

Oct-34

163.9

177.2

Manora

3.4

(0.8)

0.4

2.9

47%

Apr-30

Aug-31

45.7

17.2

Nong Yao

16.9

(3.6)

0.6

13.9

16%

Dec-33

Sep-33

416.1

257.4

Wassana

12.9

(1.2)

7.9

19.7

686%

Dec-35

Dec-41

126.6

240.1

Total

50.0

(8.5)

16.3

57.8

192%

752.2

692.0

2P reserves by field, and their associated after-tax 2P NPV 10 values are indicated below. The year-on-year change between the NSAI 2024 Report and NSAI 2025 Report indicates an increase in both 2P reserves volumes and the associated after-tax value for both the Jasmine and Wassana fields, reflecting the conversion of 2C resources to 2P reserves in both instances, bolstered in particular by the Company’s decision to proceed with redevelopment of the Wassana field, for which the final investment decision was announced in May 2025.

Reserves volumes and associated after-tax 2P values for the Manora and Nong Yao fields have decreased between the NSAI 2024 Report and NSAI 2025 Report, driven primarily by the significantly reduced forecast oil pricing applied in the year-end 2025 evaluation vs the year-end 2024 evaluation. In the case of Nong Yao, the year-on-year decline in NPV 10 is also influenced by the valuation ‘roll-forward’ effect: following the field’s expansion in 2024, Nong Yao delivered strong production in 2025, effectively bringing forward and monetising a meaningful portion of the value previously reflected in NSAI 2024 Report. This value realisation was partially offset by reserves replacement at Nong Yao, with NSAI reporting additions during 2025 that helped replenish the reserve base and support ongoing field life.

Fields

Gross (Before Royalties) 2P Reserves,
Working Interest Share (MMbbls)

2P NPV 10 After Tax (US$ million)

31 December 2023

31 December 2024

31 December 2025

31 December 2023

31 December 2024

31 December 2025

Jasmine

10.4

16.8

21.2

81.8

163.9

177.2

Manora

2.2

3.4

2.9

21.2

45.7

17.2

Nong Yao

12.4

16.9

13.9

185.6

416.1

257.4

Wassana

12.9

12.9

19.7

139.9

126.6

240.1

Total

37.9

50.0

57.8

428.5

752.2

692.0

Near-term forecast oil prices in the NSAI 2025 Report are 19% lower than in the NSAI 2024 Report. The Brent crude oil reference prices used in estimating the future net revenue from oil reserves have been revised downward in accordance with the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook requirements, which mandates the use of forward curve prices in near-term forecasts.

Report

Brent crude oil reference price for the year ended

31 December 2026

31 December 2027

31 December 2028

31 December 2029

31 December 2030

Thereafter

NSAI 2024 Report (US$/bbl)

78.51

79.89

81.82

83.46

85.13

2% inflation

NSAI 2025 Report (US$/bbl)

63.92

69.13

74.36

76.10

77.62

2% inflation

Difference (US$/bbl)

(14.59)

(10.76)

(7.46)

(7.36)

(7.51)

–

Difference (%)

(19%)

(13%)

(9%)

(9%)

(9%)

(9%)

Net present values of future net revenue from oil reserves are based on cost estimates as of the date of the NSAI 2025 Report, and the forecast Brent crude oil reference prices as indicated above. Specific price forecasts for each of the Company’s fields are adjusted for oil quality and market differentials, as guided by actual recent price realisations for each of the fields’ crude oil sales.

All estimated costs associated with the eventual decommissioning of the Company’s fields are included as part of the calculation of future net revenue. As in previous years, this can result in a negative future net revenue estimate for the 1P Proved Producing Developed category as these most conservative volumes are encumbered with the entire decommissioning cost for the field.

Future Net Revenue by Field

Before Tax NPV 10 (US$ million)

Jasmine (Light/Med.)

Manora (Light/Med.)

Nong Yao (Light/Med.)

Wassana (Heavy)

Total

Proved

Producing Developed

(53.7)

(8.1)

25.7

34.3

(70.5)

Non-Producing Developed

63.6

4.5

7.0

20.0

95.2

Undeveloped

(5.4)

3.4

98.6

279.8

376.4

Total Proved (1P)

4.4

(0.2)

131.3

265.5

401.1

Total Probable (P2)

222.5

18.9

177.4

52.0

470.8

Total Proved + Probable (2P)

226.9

18.7

308.7

317.6

871.9

Total Possible (P3)

201.6

19.4

150.5

61.2

432.7

Total Proved + Probable + Possible (3P)

428.6

38.2

459.1

378.8

1,304.6

Future Net Revenue by Field

After Tax NPV 10 (US$ million)

Jasmine (Light/Med.)

Manora (Light/Med.)

Nong Yao (Light/Med.)

Wassana (Heavy)

Total

Proved

Producing Developed

(59.0)

(8.1)

25.7

(34.3)

(75.8)

Non-Producing Developed

58.9

4.5

7.0

20.0

90.5

Undeveloped

2.5

3.4

97.1

253.0

356.0

Total Proved (1P)

2.4

(0.2)

129.7

238.7

370.6

Total Probable (P2)

174.9

17.4

127.7

1.4

321.3

Total Proved + Probable (2P)

177.2

17.2

257.4

240.1

692.0

Total Possible (P3)

124.5

14.7

92.4

24.3

255.9

Total Proved + Probable + Possible (3P)

301.7

31.9

349.8

264.4

947.9

Contingent Resources

NSAI assessed the Company’s contingent resources of its Thailand assets for additional reservoir accumulations and reported estimates in the NSAI 2025 Report, as it has done in each of the preceding three years. Contingent resources are heavy crude oil and light/medium crude oil, and are further divided into three subcategories, being Development Unclarified, Development Not Viable, and Development on Hold (see oil and gas advisories). Each subcategory is assigned a percentage risk, reflecting the estimated chance of development. Aggregate totals are provided below.

Contingent Resources

NSAI 2023 Report
Gross (Before Royalties) Working Interest Share

NSAI 2024 Report
Gross (Before Royalties) Working Interest share

NSAI 2025 Report
Gross (Before Royalties) Working Interest Share

Unrisked (MMbbls)

Risked (MMbbls)

Unrisked (MMbbls)

Risked (MMbbls)

Unrisked (MMbbls)

Risked (MMbbls)

Low Estimate (1C)

15.2

6.5

29.4

9.2

29.9

10.3

Best Estimate (2C)

19.9

8.9

48.5

13.5

39.5

7.0

High Estimate (3C)

27.9

11.6

72.1

18.0

58.9

8.9

During 2025, Valeura successfully converted a substantial portion of its Best Estimate (2C) Contingent Resources to Reserves.

The above Contingent Resources do not include any resources from the Farm-in Transaction, where Valeura expects to earn a 40% non-operated working interest in Gulf of Thailand blocks G1/65 and G3/65. The Farm-in Transaction is subject to government approval, which is anticipated in due course, following completion of Thailand’s general election.

Further Disclosure

Valeura intends to disclose a summary of the NSAI 2025 Report to Thailand’s upstream regulator later in February 2025. Thereafter, the Company will publish its estimates of reserves and resources in accordance with the requirements of National Instrument 51-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities along with its annual information form for the year ended 31 December 2025, in March 2026.

For further information, please contact:

Valeura Energy Inc. (General Corporate Enquiries) +65 6373 6940
Sean Guest, President and CEO
Yacine Ben-Meriem, CFO
Contact@valeuraenergy.com

Valeura Energy Inc. (Investor and Media Enquiries) +1 403 975 6752 / +44 7392 940495
Robin James Martin, Vice President, Communications and Investor Relations
IR@valeuraenergy.com

Contact details for the Company’s advisors, covering research analysts and joint brokers, including Auctus Advisors LLP, Beacon Securities Limited, Canaccord Genuity Ltd (UK), Cormark Securities Inc., Research Capital Corporation, Roth Canada Inc., and Stifel Nicolaus Europe Limited, are listed on the Company’s website at www.valeuraenergy.com/investor-information/analysts/.

About the Company

Valeura Energy Inc. is a Canadian public company engaged in the exploration, development and production of petroleum and natural gas in Thailand and in Türkiye. The Company is pursuing a growth-oriented strategy and intends to re-invest into its producing asset portfolio and to deploy resources toward further organic and inorganic growth in Southeast Asia. Valeura aspires toward value accretive growth for stakeholders while adhering to high standards of environmental, social and governance responsibility.

Additional information relating to Valeura is also available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

Oil and Gas Advisories

Reserves and contingent resources disclosed in this news release are based on an independent evaluation

conducted by the incumbent independent petroleum engineering firm, NSAI with an effective date of 31 December 2025. The NSAI estimates of reserves and resources were prepared using guidelines outlined in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook and in accordance with National Instrument 51-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Oil and Gas Activities . The reserves and contingent resources estimates disclosed in this news release are estimates only and there is no guarantee that the estimated reserves and contingent resources will be recovered.

This news release contains a number of oil and gas metrics, including ‘NAV’, ‘reserves replacement ratio’, ‘RLI’, and ‘end of field life’ which do not have standardised meanings or standard methods of calculation and therefore such measures may not be comparable to similar measures used by other companies. Such metrics are commonly used in the oil and gas industry and have been included herein to provide readers with additional measures to evaluate the Company’s performance; however, such measures are not reliable indicators of the future performance of the Company and future performance may not compare to the performance in previous periods.

‘NAV’ is calculated by adding the estimated future net revenues based on a 10% discount rate to net cash, (which is comprised of cash less debt) as of 31 December 2025. NAV is expressed on a per share basis by dividing the total by basic Common Shares outstanding. NAV per share is not predictive and may not be reflective of current or future market prices for Valeura.

‘Reserves replacement ratio’ for 2025 is calculated by dividing the difference in reserves between the NSAI 2025 Report and the NSAI 2024 Report, plus actual 2025 production, by the assets’ total production before royalties for the calendar year 2025.

‘RLI’ is calculated by dividing reserves by management’s estimated total production before royalties for 2026.

‘End of field life’ is calculated by NSAI as the date at which the monthly net revenue generated by the field is equal to or less than the asset’s operating cost.

Reserves

Reserves are estimated remaining quantities of commercially recoverable oil, natural gas, and related substances anticipated to be recoverable from known accumulations, as of a given date, based on the analysis of drilling, geological, geophysical, and engineering data, the use of established technology, and specified economic conditions, which are generally accepted as being reasonable. Reserves are further categorised according to the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub-classified based on development and production status.

Proved reserves are those reserves that can be estimated with a high degree of certainty to be recoverable. It is likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the estimated proved reserves.

Developed reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered from existing wells and installed facilities or, if facilities have not been installed, that would involve a low expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of drilling a well) to put the reserves on production.

Developed producing reserves are those reserves that are expected to be recovered from completion intervals open at the time of the estimate. These reserves may be currently producing or, if shut in, they must have previously been on production, and the date of resumption of production must be known with reasonable certainty.

Developed non-producing reserves are those reserves that either have not been on production, or have previously been on production, but are shut in, and the date of resumption of production is unknown.

Undeveloped reserves are those reserves expected to be recovered from known accumulations where a significant expenditure (e.g., when compared to the cost of drilling a well) is required to render them capable of production. They must fully meet the requirements of the reserves classification (proved, probable, possible) to which they are assigned.

Probable reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than proved reserves. It is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the sum of the estimated proved plus probable reserves.

Possible reserves are those additional reserves that are less certain to be recovered than probable reserves. It is unlikely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will exceed the sum of the estimated proved plus probable plus possible reserves. There is a 10% probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the sum of the estimated proved plus probable plus possible reserves.

The estimated future net revenues disclosed in this news release do not necessarily represent the fair market value of the reserves associated therewith.

The estimates of reserves and future net revenue for individual properties may not reflect the same confidence level as estimates of reserves and future net revenue for all properties, due to the effects of aggregation.

Contingent Resources

Contingent resources are those quantities of petroleum estimated, as of a given date, to be potentially recoverable from known accumulations using established technology or technology under development, but which are not currently considered to be commercially recoverable due to one or more contingencies. Contingencies are conditions that must be satisfied for a portion of contingent resources to be classified as reserves that are: (a) specific to the project being evaluated; and (b) expected to be resolved within a reasonable timeframe.

Contingent resources are further categorised according to the level of certainty associated with the estimates and may be sub‐classified based on a project maturity and/or characterised by their economic status. There are three classifications of contingent resources: low estimate, best estimate and high estimate. Best estimate is a classification of estimated resources described in the Canadian Oil and Gas Evaluation Handbook as the best estimate of the quantity that will be actually recovered; it is equally likely that the actual remaining quantities recovered will be greater or less than the best estimate. If probabilistic methods are used, there should be at least a 50 percent probability that the quantities actually recovered will equal or exceed the best estimate.

The project maturity subclasses include development pending, development on hold, development unclarified and development not viable. The contingent resources disclosed in this news release are classified as either development unclarified, development not viable, or development on hold.

Development unclarified is defined as a contingent resource that requires further appraisal to clarify the potential for development and has been assigned a lower chance of development until commercial considerations can be clearly defined. Chance of development is the likelihood that an accumulation will be commercially developed.

Conversion of the development unclarified resources referred to in this news release is dependent upon (1) the expected timetable for development; (2) the economics of the project; (3) the marketability of the oil and gas production; (4) the availability of infrastructure and technology; (5) the political, regulatory, and environmental conditions; (6) the project maturity and definition; (7) the availability of capital; and, ultimately, (8) the decision of joint venture partners to undertake development.

The major positive factor relevant to the estimate of the contingent development unclarified resources referred to in this news release is the successful discovery of resources encountered in appraisal and development wells within the existing fields. The major negative factors relevant to the estimate of the contingent development unclarified resources referred to in this news release are: (1) the outstanding requirement for a definitive development plan; (2) current economic conditions do not support the resource development; (3) limited field economic life to develop the resources; and (4) the outstanding requirement for a final investment decision and commitment of all joint venture partners.

Development not viable is defined as a contingent resource where no further data acquisition or evaluation is currently planned and hence there is a low chance of development, there is usually less than a reasonable chance of economics of development being positive in the foreseeable future. The major negative factors relevant to the estimate of development not viable referred to in this news release are: (1) current economic conditions do not support the resource development; and (2) availability of technical knowledge and technology within the industry to economically support resource development.

Development on hold is defined as a contingent resource where there is a reasonable chance of development, but there are contingencies to be resolved before the project can move forward.

If these contingencies are successfully addressed, some portion of these contingent resources may be reclassified as reserves.

Of the best estimate 2C contingent resources estimated in the NSAI 2025 Report, on a risked basis: 63% of the estimated volumes are light/medium crude oil, with the remainder being heavy oil; 42% are categorised as Development Unclarified, with the remainder being Development Not Viable. Development Unclarified 2C resources have been assigned an average chances of development for the four fields ranging from 5% to 85%, while 2C Development Not Viable resources have been assigned an average chance of development ranging from 10% to 15%.

Contingent resources within the Development on hold category are only in the 1C certainty estimate (low or conservative). The main contingencies are licence extensions and continuation of drilling beyond five years. These contingencies are considered to have a high chance of positive resolution and are therefore not applied in the best estimates of respective reserves and resources (2P and 2C).

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Light and Medium Crude Oil (Development Unclarified)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Unclarified

1,812

1,698

380

355

10% – 85%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Unclarified

2,334

2,190

528

494

10% – 85%

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Unclarified

3,418

3,216

793

744

10% – 85%

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Heavy Crude Oil (Development Unclarified)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Unclarified

4,163

3,924

1,836

1,730

5% – 60%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Unclarified

6,006

5,661

2,393

2,256

5% – 60%

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Unclarified

9,324

8,788

3,149

2,968

5% – 60%

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Light and Medium Crude Oil (Development Not Viable)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Not Viable

16,808

15,460

2,521

2,319

5% – 15%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Not Viable

30,057

27,577

3,870

3,552

5% – 15%

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Not Viable

45,326

41,543

4,801

4,400

5% – 15%

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Heavy Crude Oil (Development Not Viable)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development Not Viable

1,256

1,183

188

178

15%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development Not Viable

1,114

1,050

167

158

15%

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development Not Viable

847

799

127

120

15%

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Light and Medium Crude Oil (Development on Hold)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development on Hold

4,224

3,738

3,850

3,409

90% – 95%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development on Hold

–

–

–

–

–

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development on Hold

–

–

–

–

–

Resources Project Maturity subclass

Heavy Crude Oil (Development on Hold)

Chance of Development (%)

Unrisked

Risked

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Gross (Mbbls)

Net (Mbbls)

Contingent Low Estimate (1C) Development on Hold

1,659

1,564

1,506

1,420

90% – 95%

Contingent Best Estimate (2C) Development on Hold

–

–

–

–

–

Contingent High Estimate (3C) Development on Hold

–

–

–

–

–

The NSAI estimates have been risked, using the chance of development, to account for the possibility that the contingencies are not successfully addressed.

Glossary

bbls

barrels of oil

Mbbls

thousand barrels of oil

MMbbls

million barrels of oil

Advisory and Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Information

Certain information included in this news release constitutes forward-looking information under applicable securities legislation. Such forward-looking information is for the purpose of explaining management’s current expectations and plans relating to the future. Readers are cautioned that reliance on such information may not be appropriate for other purposes, such as making investment decisions. Forward-looking information typically contains statements with words such as ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘expect’, ‘plan’, ‘intend’, ‘estimate’, ‘propose’, ‘project’, ‘target’ or similar words suggesting future outcomes or statements regarding an outlook.

Forward-looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, management’s anticipation that completion of the Farm-in Transaction will be additive to volumes and values; management’s expectation of receiving governmental approval of the Farm-in Transaction and the timing thereof; management’s continued focus on contingent resources and the anticipated growth of resources; the ability to add more years of future cash flow, for the benefit of all stakeholders; the ability to drive deeper and longer-lived value from the Company’s assets, even when faced with a correction in commodity prices; the Company’s anticipated 2026 production guidance of 19.5 – 22.5 Mbbls/d; dates for the anticipated end of field life of Valeura’s assets; forecast oil prices; the Company’s intention to disclose a summary of the NSAI 2025 Report to Thailand’s upstream regulator and the anticipated timing thereof; and the anticipated filing date of the Company’s annual information form along with its estimates of reserves and resources.

Forward-looking information is based on management’s current expectations and assumptions regarding, among other things: political stability of the areas in which the Company is operating; continued safety of operations and ability to proceed in a timely manner; continued operations of and approvals forthcoming from governments and regulators in a manner consistent with past conduct; future drilling activity on the required/expected timelines; the prospectivity of the Company’s lands; the continued favourable pricing and operating netbacks across its business; future production rates and associated operating netbacks and cash flow; decline rates; future sources of funding; future economic conditions; the impact of inflation of future costs; future currency exchange rates; interest rates; the ability to meet drilling deadlines and fulfil commitments under licences and leases; future commodity prices; the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine; royalty rates and taxes; future capital and other expenditures; the success obtained in drilling new wells and working over existing wellbores; the performance of wells and facilities; the availability of the required capital to funds its exploration, development and other operations, and the ability of the Company to meet its commitments and financial obligations; the ability of the Company to secure adequate processing, transportation, fractionation and storage capacity on acceptable terms; the capacity and reliability of facilities; the application of regulatory requirements respecting abandonment and reclamation; the recoverability of the Company’s reserves and contingent resources; future growth; the sufficiency of budgeted capital expenditures in carrying out planned activities; the impact of increasing competition; the ability to efficiently integrate assets and employees acquired through acquisitions; global energy policies going forward; future debt levels; and the Company’s continued ability to obtain and retain qualified staff and equipment in a timely and cost efficient manner. In addition, the Company’s work programmes and budgets are in part based upon expected agreement among joint venture partners and associated exploration, development and marketing plans and anticipated costs and sales prices, which are subject to change based on, among other things, the actual results of drilling and related activity, availability of drilling, offshore storage and offloading facilities and other specialised oilfield equipment and service providers, changes in partners’ plans and unexpected delays and changes in market conditions. Although the Company believes the expectations and assumptions reflected in such forward-looking information are reasonable, they may prove to be incorrect.

Forward-looking information involves significant known and unknown risks and uncertainties. Exploration, appraisal, and development of oil and natural gas reserves and resources are speculative activities and involve a degree of risk. A number of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by the Company including, but not limited to: the ability of management to execute its business plan or realise anticipated benefits from acquisitions; the risk of disruptions from public health emergencies and/or pandemics; competition for specialised equipment and human resources; the Company’s ability to manage growth; the Company’s ability to manage the costs related to inflation; disruption in supply chains; the risk of currency fluctuations; changes in interest rates, oil and gas prices and netbacks; potential changes in joint venture partner strategies and participation in work programmes; uncertainty regarding the contemplated timelines and costs for work programme execution; the risks of disruption to operations and access to worksites; potential changes in laws and regulations, the uncertainty regarding government and other approvals; counterparty risk; the risk that financing may not be available; risks associated with weather delays and natural disasters; and the risk associated with international activity. See the most recent annual information form and management’s discussion and analysis of the Company for a detailed discussion of the risk factors.

The forward-looking information contained in this new release is made as of the date hereof and the Company undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, unless required by applicable securities laws. The forward-looking information contained in this new release is expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy securities in any jurisdiction, including where such offer would be unlawful. This news release is not for distribution or release, directly or indirectly, in or into the United States, Ireland, the Republic of South Africa or Japan or any other jurisdiction in which its publication or distribution would be unlawful.

Neither the Toronto Stock Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the Toronto Stock Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this news release.

This information is provided by Reach, the non-regulatory press release distribution service of RNS, part of the London Stock Exchange. 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.

SOURCE: Valeura Energy Inc.

View the original press release on ACCESS Newswire

News Provided by ACCESS Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Dr. Adam Trexler: Physical Gold Market Broken, Crisis Unfolding Now

Dr. Adam Trexler, founder and president of Valaurum, shares his thoughts on gold, identifying a key issue he sees developing in the physical market.

‘There’s a crisis in the physical gold market,’ he said, explaining that sector participants need to figure out how to serve investors who want to own gold, but can’t afford current bar and coin prices.

Securities Disclosure: I, Charlotte McLeod, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Panelists: Silver in Bull Market, but Expect Price Volatility

Gold often dominates conversations at the annual Vancouver Resource Investment Conference (VRIC), but silver’s price surge, which began in 2025 and continued into January, placed the metal firmly in the spotlight.

At this year’s silver forecast panel, Commodity Culture host and producer Jesse Day sat down with Maria Smirnova, senior portfolio manager and senior investment officer Sprott (TSX:SII,NYSE:SII); GoldSeek President and CEO Peter Spina; Peter Krauth, editor of Silver Stock Investor and Silver Advisor; and Silver Tiger Metals (TSXV:SLVR,OTCQX:SLVTF) President and CEO Glenn Jessome to discuss silver’s meteoric performance and where it could be headed next.

Significant tailwinds supporting silver

Over the past five years, the silver price has largely stagnated, trading between US$20 and US$25 per ounce until mid-2024 when the white metal crossed the US$30 mark. Even then, the price mostly held steady until 2025, when it crossed the US$35 mark in June, then passed US$40 in September and US$50 in October.

However, the most significant rise came at the start of December, when momentum took over, sending silver on a historic run that pushed it to a record high of US$116 by the end of January.

Behind these meteoric gains was a highly volatile silver market, which, despite strong fundamentals, became highly speculative and attractive to investors seeking an alternative to gold, which is also trading at all-time highs.

“You buy gold to prevent losing money, and you buy silver to make money, to buy more gold,” Spina said.

Silver is in the midst of a six-year structural supply deficit, with the expectation that it will continue through 2026.

A key driver of this deficit is silver’s growing role in industrial applications. Although its biggest gains have come from its use in solar panel production, it’s also important to several other sectors, including automotive and defense.

“We wouldn’t have a modern civilization without silver. It’s used in a myriad of different places, and what is interesting now is that silver is very critical to the national defense of the US, of China, of big superpowers. So it’s becoming weaponized,” Spina explained. He noted that the US designated silver a critical mineral in 2025, placing it alongside copper for strategic purposes, and suggested that stockpiling is likely underway.

In addition to demand driving the silver price, Spina also noted that investors who had been absent from the market for many years moved into net-buying positions last year, which has helped to accelerate the market.

“Its more serious than the gold market, because silver is so essential in our daily lives,” Spina said.

While demand increases, a serious situation is developing on the supply side. The majority of silver produced today comes as a byproduct from mining other metals like copper and zinc.

Jessome outlined how perilous the supply side is, noting that in 2025 there were just 52 primary silver mines worldwide; by the end of 2026, that number is expected to fall to 46, and in 2027 to 39.

With so few mines and high prices, the expectation is that there would be new production set to come online, and although there are some in the pipeline, including Jessome’s Silver Tiger, the reality is that starting a new mine is fraught with challenges. He noted that, from the first drill hole to production, the average time is 17 years.

“From that first drill hole to a commercial mine, it’s one in 1,000. So if you think that we’re going to solve this 39 in the next year, it’s not easy, it’s hard,” Jessome told the VRIC audience.

He continued to explain that, regardless of what happens with the price, people don’t realize there’s not enough silver.

Bull markets, retractions and getting ahead

Even though silver’s fundamentals support high prices, the questions on many lips throughout VRIC were: ‘Is it too much too soon?’ and ‘Is it a bull market or is it a bubble?’

The consensus was that the metal remains in a bull market, but is exhibiting some bubble-like characteristics; investors can expect corrections, but silver will likely maintain momentum.

“We’re multiple percent above the 200 day moving average. This is not something that’s sustainable. If we continue at this pace, it would suck all the money from the markets into this one asset. It’s not likely to continue,” Krauth said just days prior to a significant correction that took the silver price back below US$70.

He pointed to the 2001 to 2011 bull market: silver rose from US$4 to nearly US$50, but along the way, there were corrections. “There were five corrections of 15 percent or more. The average correction was 30 percent. That would take us to US$75, US$80 right now,” Krauth emphasized to the audience at VRIC.

While the expert explained that a silver correction of that magnitude wouldn’t be shocking, he also pointed out that miners would still be pretty happy at those prices.

Given the market volatility, Spina echoed much of Krauth’s belief that there is reason for investors to be excited but also urged caution, commenting, “I would be very, very cautious in trying to trade this, especially with leverage or anything like that, but I do think that we’re in the revaluation phase. Silver could go a lot higher, but along the way, we can get some very vicious pullbacks, and so one has to be ready for those events.’

Smirnova urged calm, and that she was hopeful for a correction, agreeing with Krauth that the parabolic trajectory of silver wasn’t sustainable, and saying she sees gold market as more steady.

She also suggested that, rather than chasing opportunities, investors should be patient and wait for them to come to them, rather than being fearful in such a volatile market.

“I would urge people to think, sit back, and think about the reasons why silver ran in the first place, and whether those reasons are continuing right now, and they will. I think the fundamentals haven’t changed for silver, using corrections as opportunities to reload, to enter, to buy things that you know you like as an investor,” Smirnova said.

Investor takeaway

Overall, the panel was in agreement that the main factors fueling a strong silver market, supply and demand, investment, and a bifurcated market, aren’t going anywhere anytime soon.

Demand for silver goes beyond investment and is set to play a crucial role in the energy transition, AI and technology, and national defense. However, they also agreed that it’s probably run up to fast, and needs a correction, which started to happen on January 29, but none expected the bull market to come to an end.

Smirnova did an excellent job of putting the changing silver market into perspective for investors.

“We mine and produce, between scrap and mining supply, 1 billion ounces a year at US$30. That was a US$30 billion market. At US$100 it’s a US$100 billion market. It’s nothing. We have companies trading at trillion-dollar valuations in the market. The whole silver market is $100 billion a year, so it really does not take a lot of money to move the price, and that’s why I think it’s gone from US$30 to US$100 in no time at all,” she said.

While these price shifts don’t require significant capital inflows, they make a significant difference across the sector. Krauth noted that the price of silver hasn’t really been factored in for silver developers or producers because their projections are currently based on prices that are two-thirds lower.

“Almost nobody ever uses spot prices. They’re arguably two-thirds below spot price,’ he said.

‘So when the next few quarters come in and the market starts to realize what kind of cash these projects are generating, I think that’s when the reality will start to set in,” Krauth added.

The panel was largely optimistic that opportunities will continue to arise in the silver market. They noted that physical silver prices tend to be more volatile, but there are safer options for investors who don’t want to miss out.

Securities Disclosure: I, Dean Belder, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Investing

Trevor Hall: Bull Markets Don’t Always Mean Big Returns

Clear Commodity Network CEO and Mining Stock Daily host Trevor Hall opened his talk at the Vancouver Resource Investment Conference (VRIC) with a strong message: It is still possible to go broke in a bull market.

“I want to start with the simple but uncomfortable truth: most investors don’t lose money in bear markets,” he said.

“They lose it in bull markets. Bear markets are honest. Liquidity disappears; prices fall. Risk is obvious, and fear keeps people cautious. Bull markets, on the other hand, are deceptive.”

According to Hall, bull markets feed the idea that everything is working well.

Charts and spreadsheet data convince investors and business owners that it is the perfect time to make big decisions, making this the phase of the cycle where moves are based on impulse.

“Rising prices get confused with good business, compelling stores get confused with durable assets. Bull markets don’t expose bad ideas immediately; they carry, and that’s why the damage is so severe when cycles turn.”

For short, people get too excited, focusing on the potential weight of what they can earn soon without realizing how much they could lose in the long run.

Supercycle review

Ultimately, what is needed is a shift in mindset. Hall specified that the first point that has to be recognised is that bull markets do not mean that everyone is making money.

“High prices produce a false sense of security. They made marginal assets look competitive,” he said. “They mask permitting challenges, metallurgy issues, infrastructure gaps in management, weaknesses and too much capital changed too many projects simply because the spreadsheet said it works. Investors have need to learn from that in today’s market.”

Momentum is not directly proportional to skill, and government involvement does not eliminate risk.

He cited 2011 as the last super cycle that created enormous opportunities, but also created enormous mistakes.

At the time, companies jumped into spending on huge projects and capital expenditure blowout, not accounting for returns.

Some companies also lost control and went all in on mergers and acquisitions, while developers “pursued production growth for the sake of growth.”

The sector focused on volume, therefore burning investors. The market funded every project that screams as economic at high spot prices.

This lack of discipline led to over a decade’s worth of rebuilding mining credibility.

Now, the sector has changed. This time, companies that generate durable margins, stick to realistic timelines, manage risk and focus on humility will be rewarded.

It’s all in discipline.

Advice for companies

Hall specified certain aspects he believes investors who have learned from the super cycle are now looking for. We summarised them into five points:
  • Concrete de-risk plans with achievable milestones
  • Strict capital discipline, especially on operating and construction costs
  • Management teams with experience in leadership, permitting, engineering and community relations
  • Productive offtakes

“Capital is no longer betting solely on geology. It’s betting on execution,” the CEO stated. “Investors want to see alignment with users, so institutional investors are screening for policy alignment projects that strengthen domestic supply chains, support energy security and fit federal or state strategic priorities.”

Above all, across all this is transparency. Hall said that it is a must and called it “the new currency of trust in this sector.”

Advice for investors

“Many deposits look promising, far fewer have teams capable of construction and operations,” Hall said, adding that while high metal prices do help the sector, they also encourage a wave of marginal projects that do not deserve capital.

Maintaining high standards amidst high prices is vital. He advised investors to ask the following questions before making decisions:

  • Does the project work within conservative price limits or not? Does it have structural advantages?
  • Does it have grade, jurisdiction, scale and production cost?
  • Does the project matter? Does it solve a supply deficit?
  • Does it serve a strategic need, or is it simply additive but unnecessary?
  • Can management actually build it?

Making the right moves

Hall likened his industry recommendations to that of a chess game: make decisive moves and manage risks. It’s not just about what’s in front of you; it’s how you can win.

The industry is entering a new era where the investment cycle is not only driven by numbers and market forces, but by strategic necessity.

It is also the first time in decades that government capital, institutional capital and private capital are moving in the same direction, posing bigger opportunities.

Companies must learn to listen and execute to remain in the game for the next decade of resource development, and investors should come into the space with clear expectations.

“I think the ultimate word is check your discipline, because your discipline and your expectations need to be in line and more in tune than ever before,” Hall told companies.

“And for investors out there listening, you have to remember this: bull markets don’t make people rich by default; they reveal who already have the discipline.”

Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Whispering death: Army’s new M1E3 Abrams tank is a hybrid-drive silent killer

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has his ‘Arsenal of Freedom Tour’ in full swing, visiting the nuclear submarine production floor at Newport News, Virginia and Blue Origin’s space launch at Cape Canaveral Florida. His goal: restore American industrial prowess and secure freedom for generations to come.

You’ll never guess which program is moving fastest of all: it’s the Army’s new M1E3 Abrams tank.

Get this: the M1E3 Abrams is five years ahead of schedule. Yes, five years. And it’s a hybrid.

While Golden Dome missile defense, the battleship design and other programs are on the drawing board, the Army has accelerated the M1E3 Abrams to wartime pace.

Credit Army Chief of Staff General Randy George and Secretary of the Army Dan Driscoll. It’s part of their push to accelerate top programs like the MV-75 air assault tilt-rotor plane. In the case of the tank, the Army had been studying upgrades and watching the Ukraine war. George and his science adviser Dr. Alex Miller were told they would not see the tank until 2032. ‘We said no,’ Miller recalled.

The result: the M1E3 prototype rolled out at the Detroit Auto Show in January. The first platoon of the M1E3 will be ready for testing by soldiers in 2028.

As seen in Detroit, the new M1E3 is a sleek change from earlier Abrams models. Gone is the top turret position. Now the three-man crew side by side in the hull where armor is strongest. External cameras, sensors, heat-detecting thermal sights, and laser-range finders feed into gaming-inspired cockpit displays. Their remote? It’s not for changing channels. An M1E3 tank crew can remotely fire Javelin anti-tank missile with a 2.5-mile range and a range of other weapons, including loitering munitions.

Here are five killer attributes of the M1E3 Abrams.

  • Formula One Cockpit. The M1E3 tank has a driver interface that ‘looks like an Xbox controller,’ said George. Just as important, the tank uses a modular, ‘plug-and-play’ open systems software backbone. Soldiers can plug in new apps and upgrade it in at a point in the vehicle software where all the things that make the vehicle run are protected.
  • Quiet mode. It’s a hybrid. No, the Army isn’t going eco-friendly. The M1E3 will have a Caterpillar diesel engine and a SAPA transmission that allows it to switch into electric mode. The hybrid electric drive is all about silent stalking. Iraqis facing the Abrams in 1991 called it Whispering Death, but the new Abrams takes the silent mode into a new realm when the tank is running on electric. Add in heat signature reduction and electronic jammers. This is not eco-mode. It’s whispering death. Iraqi soldiers reportedly feared the quiet killing power of the Abrams in 1991 Gulf War; the new Abrams takes silent lethality to a new level.
  • Active Protection. Shoot at an Abrams and ‘active protection’ will detect, target and obliterate you. This is the Army’s term for a system that can sort out a whole range of incoming threats, from recoilless rifles to anti-tank guided missiles, rockets, tank rounds and rocket-propelled grenades.  And of course, drones. The best part is the detection system nails the location of the enemy shooter. So, the Abrams crew can destroy it.
  • Reactive Armor. Already an Abrams standard, tiles fitted on the tank hull prevent penetration by RPGs and deflect blast downward or outwards, depending on the tactical situation. The Army really doesn’t like to talk about this secretive system, but guarantee you, the M1E3 will improve on it.
  • Great Guns.  With lessons drawn from the Ukraine battlefield, a .30-mm chain gun replaces both the .50-caliber and the loader’s gun. The .30-mm can hit light-armor vehicles like the Russian BMP. It can also chew up drones. Remember remote control permits the crew to fire without popping the hatch.

By the way, this is a tank on a diet. Older Abrams models weigh close to 80 tons. Expect the M1E3 to weigh in at about 60 tons, after shedding top turret armor. Lighter weight yields about 40% greater fuel efficiency. It also allows the M1E3 tank to access 30% more bridge crossings in Poland and other NATO Eastern front-line countries facing Russia.

Why a new tank? To deter Russia. The Ukraine war could stop tomorrow, and Putin’s Russia would still be a long-term threat. Russia has lost over 3,000 tanks in Ukraine but can still produce 1,500 tanks per year, according to former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General Christopher Cavoli.

In the end, it is the tank that deters the taking of territory. Just ask the soldiers of the 3rd Battalion, 66th Armored Regiment, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team, who wrapped up an armored live-fire exercise in Poland during Operation Winter Falcon last month. Polish and U.S. forces fired their M1A2 Abrams tanks side by side. ‘We train to be ready for anything that might happen in the future … you’ve [got to] do that in the place you may have to defend,’ said U.S. Army Col. Matthew Kelley, Commander, 1st Armored Brigade Combat Team.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By