# ETM - Energy Transition Minerals



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 May 2007)

OMG is all I can say!  

CDU all over again! Looks to have pulled off the deal of the century with its acquisition of a Ranium/Thorium Rare Earths deposit in Greenland!


----------



## sam76 (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

$1.6000   $1.4700   1130.8%  1.1500 1.7000 1,559,822 

OMFG  nice to have a couple of lazy mil in the oppies


----------



## bigt (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

Wow, over 100 million pounds of Uranium...though looks like they cant mine it in Greenland currently.


----------



## chris1983 (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

I personally wouldnt touch them.  Read the message again.  See below.  Very risky.  Way better stocks out there to gamble on IMO.  They will probably keep running but I dont have the balls to possibly see my money fall in half over a day.


_It is currently not possible to receive a mineral license for the exploration or exploitation of uranium in Greenland. Therefore, the license does not include uranium as a commodity. Although uranium is not on the license we are not prevented from exploring for uranium as part of our multi element exploration program. Based on a memorandum on Policy and Practice of the BMP concerning exploration and exploitation of uranium and other radioactive elements issued by Nuna Law, a Greenland law firm with mining law expertise,
and other information obtained, the directors believe that uranium may be exploited as a by-product subject to normal conditions of any exploitation license and subject to approval by the BMP. The Company has to apply to the BMP for such an approval. The Company has not applied for such an approval and BMP has not issued an approval. We stress this is a possibility and not a legal right._


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*



chris1983 said:


> I personally wouldnt touch them.  Read the message again.  See below.  Very risky.  Way better stocks out there to gamble on IMO.




Yeah but if you had say 50,000 GGGO that you picked up at 6c you wouldn't be complaining selling them at $1.50!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## chris1983 (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*



YOUNG_TRADER said:


> Yeah but if you had say 50,000 GGGO that you picked up at 6c you wouldn't be complaining selling them at $1.50!!!!!!!!!!!!!




Thats a totally different scenario YT.  Course investors who picked them up at that price wont complain.  I wouldnt enter at current levels.


----------



## Fool (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

lol.

Did anyone happen to be holding the options ?

1/2 a cent to this in a day, amazing if you held them


----------



## YOUNG_TRADER (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*



chris1983 said:


> I wouldnt enter at current levels.




Neither would I Chirs, no matter what the upside!

Has run far far to far for me to think about getting on board


----------



## Captain_Chaza (23 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

No history of any sale in the year 2007 in my logs Prior to today?

Maybe she should be just considered as a Maiden Voyage and Day ONE

I seem to remember lots of Uranium stocks that have and are still going up in SP without any hint of any rights and permits to mine
This might only be a fornmal prerequisite once the goods are found in the ground 

That is, It is usually only a minor formality IMO

It's amazing how one negotiates so much better when one  has a smoking barrel in hand!

Salute and Gods' speed


----------



## ahchard (24 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

i am still holding 2000 options which I paid $10 for... not a bad return... should have sold the house and put everything on it!!!


----------



## clowboy (24 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*



ahchard said:


> i am still holding 2000 options which I paid $10 for... not a bad return... should have sold the house and put everything on it!!!




Why, and how would you buy $10 worth of options?

Still a handsome return, even after brokerage?, well done.


----------



## ahchard (24 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

Bought 2000 GGG shares at 0.445 and there was a bonus options offer to shareholders for 0.005...

yes not a bad return, and there was no brokerage for purchasing the options.


----------



## ta2693 (24 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*



ahchard said:


> Bought 2000 GGG shares at 0.445 and there was a bonus options offer to shareholders for 0.005...
> 
> yes not a bad return, and there was no brokerage for purchasing the options.




what makes you invest in GGG? I even did not hear about it before its unbelievable shooting. Thank you very much.


----------



## moneymajix (25 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

Announcement

Company Presentation

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20070525/pdf/312n1chxrjk5q9.pdf


----------



## canny (25 May 2007)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

It was VERY OMG on the day - but what amazes me is the fact that it's held and still very solid at this level.
I really exoected a pull back by now.
Is it being kept buoyant now by trders who want it as a play thing for a few more sessions, or is it really good value at this price?

I suspect the former - but we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## gtsman_05 (21 February 2008)

*Re: GGG - The Gold Company*

guys just to let you know of the upcoming resource upgrade on this little covered stock expected by the end of this month

(now known as Greenland Minerals & Energy)

The company uppdate announcement earlier this month

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20080208/pdf/317c51cbwjks26.pdf

check out a recent research report!!

http://www.ggg.gl/documents/broker-research-reports/

this upgrade could be a monster.


Don't forget the directors have been purchasing on market (about $480k up) over the past six months mainly in the $1.20->$1.30 region. So at these prices it looks very cheap.

Apparently there is a fair chance of the ban on Uranium mining laws being overturned later this year, given the economic prospects for the small town, with one of top 10 multi element deposits in the world.


----------



## gtsman_05 (3 March 2008)

Well hello... (**removed ramp**) BUT

Plenty of green, green, green... here at Greenland over the past two weeks 

Resource upgrade is delayed and should be here late this week or early next week.

Remember this is more than just a monster Uranium deposit, it's economic value consists more of the Rare Earths component, which is back in favour of the market


----------



## trillionaire#1 (23 April 2008)

I bought some GGG shares on a dip recently after a quick squizz at their uranium and rare earth holdings in Greenland,hopefully laws up there will change when the potential flow on effects to the economy step over the environmental concerns(sorry greenies)hey greenies? ,Greenland


----------



## topstock (5 May 2008)

Resource upgrade of inferred Resource of 338Mt at 0.031% U3O8 inclusive of 90Mt at 1.09% REO and 79Mt at 1.69% NaF (150ppm U3O8 cutoff). REO and NaF resource size currently constrained by incomplete chemical assays only. 

Which equates to 229 million pounds of U3O8, 988,000 tonnes of rare earth oxides and 1.3 million tonnes of NaF. 

Uranium at market price of $65 a pound and Rare earth at $21 a kg and Naf at $1000tonne. It's a multi billion dollar world class resource.

One thing to keep in mind though is uranium mining is currently banned from Greenland. 

But doing a comparison of GGG and Lynas corporation (LYC) another rare earth company. LYC resource currently stands at  12.2 million tonnes at 9.7% REO, giving a new resource of 1.18 million tonnes of REO.


And LYC currently Market Cap is well over a 800 million, whereas GGG Market cap is only a lil over 100 million. Making GGG a fairly undervalue company.

As with everything do your own research


----------



## topstock (5 May 2008)

I was lazy to show a real value for GGG so i thought i better do a better fundamental analysis.

GGG Resource states their resource has 229 million pounds of U3O8, 988,000 tonnes of rare earth oxides and 1.3 million tonnes of NaF.

I will not value the uranium in their site since uranium mining is banned. 

From Lynas Corporation (LYC) public announcement, they put the value of their rare earth at $21 kg. Stating the composite of their rare earth is more highly value.

Using a lower estimate of $15 dollars per kg for GGG's rare earth. 
988000 tonnes =988000000kg
988000000*15= 14.8 billion worth of rare earth

Using a estimate of $10 per kg of rare earth
988000000*10=9.8 billion worth of rare earth.


That isnt even considering the 229 million pound of uranium they have. Which is currently banned from mining, but there is talks of lifting this ban.


----------



## Gspot (5 May 2008)

Sp down 15% today, which seems strange given the reprt.
With the bullish reports I'm reading on uranium/thorium, this is one to watch.


----------



## nioka (5 May 2008)

topstock said:


> I was lazy to show a real value for GGG so i thought i better do a better fundamental analysis.
> 
> GGG Resource states their resource has 229 million pounds of U3O8, 988,000 tonnes of rare earth oxides and 1.3 million tonnes of NaF.
> 
> ...




 I don't think it is wise to consider the value of GGG's rare earths in relation to those of LYC. 

The rare earths at LYC are not associated with Uranium and are less of a problem to mine and refine. If those at GGG are associated with uranium then it is a different kettle of fish.

Then there are rare earths and rare earths. As the add says "all oils ain't oils". Some are valuable and some are not.


----------



## bas (26 August 2008)

Is anyone still following this one? I had stock from the float which i mostly sold (not at the top though...). Thinking they may be worth looking at again after another resource upgrade today.


----------



## kgee (2 November 2008)

Just recently have picked a small package of shares and options in GGG
A high risk play but I really like the look of them

By the end of the month a decision will be made on Uranium mining, and Greenlands referandum on self rule will also be decided.

From,  http://sermitsiaq.gl/rss/en_newsletter.jsp

Greenland currently passed a total ban on uranium mining in 1988, but parliament will take up the issue at the end of November. 

Couple that with the Broker Research Report  from Uranium Letter April 2008
http://www.ggg.gl/documents/broker-research-reports/ 
where it states 

"With the ban on uranium exploitation to be lifted in Greenland in the near future and a large resource upgrade to be expected in 2008, in our view, the Company has the potential to emerge to a multi-billion dollar uranium company."

A pretty optimistic broker report and I don't fully understand how they can imply the ban will be lifted when it hasn't been decided upon yet?!?!?
Yet to me it seems likely that it will... from polls I've seen it looks like the referendum for self rule which will be voted on Nov the 25th will be passed.
Greenland currently recieve a lot of financial aid from Finland with that gone maybe Uranium will be the next cash cow... it kinda makes sense to me ( NB I was wrong in making a similar assumption with FNT)

Currently there Market Cap (undiluted) is around $25 mil and they have $17 mil in the bank + what has been described as the motherload of all deposits
Plenty of directors have been topping up - no large packages but plenty of action all the same

Anyway maybe one to put on the watchlist


----------



## kgee (19 November 2008)

Well it looks like Greenland will elect for self rule on the 25th with polls indicating 75% of people are for self rule.
And on Friday ( which I think is our Saturday) the govt vote on wether or not to allow uranium mining as a by product.
If you goto http://sermitsiaq.gl/english/  theres a recent picture from a protest group ECN against the uranium mining ...but in my mind it looked like a pretty small showing....about 25 people
I'm hoping all these things bode well for GGG.
well by next monday we should no more


----------



## kgee (29 November 2008)

From Article in Sermitiaq "Solid majority for uranium as bi-product"
See http://sermitsiaq.gl/english/

Seems Parliament is in support of lifting the ban on Uranium...but it seems the Raw Matarials minister say's "he would step up the uranium information campaign prior to the final vote on the issue."
More red rope I hope not !?!?

A brighter  note I love where GGG's chairman says
'South Greenland is one big uranium province and, regardless of where we dig, uranium ends up on our shovels,' 

Ahh sweet music to my ears


----------



## kgee (2 December 2008)

After todays announcement my hate for politicians is re-envigorated again ...
" in principle we agree on mining uranium as a by product"
what kind of statement is that???

Ok its a step in the right direction but why couldn't have they worded it like..... " we agree with mining for uranium as a by product as long as all environmental issues are addressed"????

it plain ****s me
now how long do we wait? at least I made a small profit so I'll try and free carry my options while hiding them in the bottom draw...yeah right ...not with the patience of a goldfish (?) i won't be


----------



## exgeo (2 April 2009)

In-ground value equivalents given by the company on Page 23 of their November 2008 presentation work out to around US$50 Bn. Dividing this by the 334 Mt in their May 2008 JORC resource estimate gives a value per tonne of ore = US$ 150/tonne ore.

This compares with the AU$ 220/tonne of ore given by Arafura for their Nolan's Bore deposit (page 16 of ARU's 12/10/2005 presentation).


----------



## greenfield (1 May 2009)

With the action happening in both uranium and rare earths markets of recent, Greenland has had a little bit of a run-up over the past couple of weeks.

The quarterly report indicates a resource upgrade will be released at some time in the near future.

Is there anyone else holding this one?


----------



## Luciano (2 May 2009)

Yeah I bought a small parcel on Monday. Just bought it as a wild spec really. The company is obviously sitting on an amazing resource, but the elephant standing in the room is the location of that resource... on the top of a beautiful mountain ridge between two stunning fjords within sight of the town... Will the locals allow their pristine backyard to be turned into a Uranium mine? Well, obviously there'd be a heap of jobs in it for them if they did, but there will be trouble for sure. So, this stock will be a multi bagger for sure if it is allowed to fully exploit it's resource, but that potential is certainly balanced with lots of risk! Roll those dice and pray!


----------



## Gerkin (4 May 2009)

This is defiently one to watch out for. Interesting from a political point of view to see if the soon th be independent Greenland will allow such a project. The money Greenland could make would be extraordinary for both the economy and individuals. The key things driving this price up in the future are
- Resource Upgrade. I seem to think this will be released in the next 3 weeks.
- Pre Feasability Study. Released around December 2009
- Political Developments to Uranium mining in Greenland - The parliamant has already indicated that it in theory agrees with it.

I also have a positive technical point of view on the chart however I prefer fundamentals when valuing a stock.


----------



## Gerkin (7 May 2009)

Have a look at the trading pattern today, up over 23%, oppies up 40%, iminent resource upgrade, Good luck to holders


----------



## kgee (27 May 2009)

I'm surprised these haven't come up in conversation, thankfully i held onto my oppies....ticking the right boxes seen pump end dump b4, kind of have it in my head this is the real deal...its pretty hard to ignore, in my own head wer'e looking at  100% increase in REE's and who know's with the uranium 25-50. personal opinion.I don't kow but there seems to be a ground swell at the moment....and I cant talk technicals cauae I know f all about it
anyway thought i'd put the q out there


----------



## exgeo (28 May 2009)

From Timesonline. From The TimesMay 28, 2009

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25550073-5017996,00.html



> Crunch looms for green technology as China tightens grip on rare-earth metalsLeo Lewis, Asia Business Correspondent Japan’s increasingly frantic efforts to lead the world in green technology have put it on a collision course with the ambitions of China and dragged both government and industry into the murky realm of large-scale mineral smuggling.
> 
> The robust international trade in illegally mined, quota-busting rare-earth metals highlights China’s near monopoly on the raw materials for environmental technology – a 95 per cent dominance of world supply that is likely to become more widely noticed as China tightens its grip.
> 
> ...


----------



## Randoi (3 June 2009)

Hi all, I've been on GGG for about 6 months now and have been watching happily as it has slowly gathered momentum with hopefully some happy announcements around the corner.... Any idea what happened today with a 20% dump from mid 50's to low 40's?


----------



## Luciano (3 June 2009)

Wrong party won the election apparently... only one that opposed uranium mining in it's entireity. More uncertaintly for the stock now. Wouldn't be surpisedmif it dumps some more tommorrow, although I'll hold I think. Wish I'd been on the ball today... oh well!


----------



## Randoi (4 June 2009)

Luciano said:


> Wrong party won the election apparently... only one that opposed uranium mining in it's entireity. More uncertaintly for the stock now. Wouldn't be surpisedmif it dumps some more tommorrow, although I'll hold I think. Wish I'd been on the ball today... oh well!




Cheers for that Luciano, it will be interesting to watch. I agree it is still a very strong story just on the Precious Metals front (Uranium aside). Go GGG


----------



## Randoi (5 June 2009)

Now I'm confused. Clearly the election result is pointing to a hard case for uranium and as uranium is a bi-product of mining the precious metals, even that side of the story could get complicated. I really see no reason for the rally. Any ideas anyone?


----------



## Luciano (9 June 2009)

Well, it turns out that the winning party have made a coalition with 2 small centerist parties, neither of whom oppose Uranium mining, and as Greenland is heading towards independence, it will need income as it weans itself off the generous subsidies from Denmark. ALso, the Denmark pension fund has  increased it's shareholding in the company over the last few months, so it is in Denmark's interest that the company suceed. It is likely that pressure will be brought to bear from several different angles on the new govt. Only 57,000 people in  Greenland, so a very small economy with not much revenue, and GGG the only miner to be anywhere near providing a much needed royalty stream, so the odds seem stacked in favour of Uranium mining being permitted as a by product. Still uncertainty though. 

The really interesting thing the MD said, (apparently) was that the resource upgrade is supposedly coming out in the next week or two at most, and the general feeling this guy got from the MD is that there is ALOT to be excited about as a shareholder of GGG. I've read speculation that this is going to be the biggest rare earths mine in the world, before you even start on the huge Uranium resource. If everything clicks, there is no reason this stock won't hit the moon. There was some weakness today, and could well be more, so could be well worth a speculative punt on dips... just make sure you strap yourself in before the resource upgrade!!

So there you go, a whole lot of ifs, buts and maybes, but I'm locked and ready to fly anyway... "Come fly with me, come fly, let's fly away..." 

Good luck to all holders.


----------



## Luciano (9 June 2009)

Sorry, that doesn't make sense... a guy on HC rang the MD last week to chat about the political situation, and whilst the MD wasn't specific about anything, he seemed most excited about the resource upgrade. All this 3rd hand of course.


----------



## Luciano (10 June 2009)

Specifically, here is the post. Must say I was pretty happy to read it.

Post was made mid last week, so if it's correct, and this guy isn't lying through his teeth (and I have absolutely no reason to believe he is), then the RU will be coming out next week.

I just rang the managing director to get their take on this. I was told that they'll be putting out an ann. before tomorrow, however, because many of their directors are all over the world there may be a T/H early 2moro. he also pointed out that IA don't have the majority 31 seats, as i read on the online news and that there has been no change in policy as yet. In fact there was telecast debate in may and the IA party, when quizzed about U mining as a by-product said they would look at it and were open minded on the issue. I asked about the resource upgrade and he said it'll be released in a couple of weeks, they did not want to release it now because they would look desparate (his words). This means they already have it! He also said they look forward to working with whoever is in power, because they do have a massive resource so he thinks common sense will prevail. (i agree). He seemed very confident and i would say excited when he spoke of the RU.

i still like the story and it's not going to be all over like that. they have put together a very astute board, they have a world class resource, they just need the right policy to get at it, and this new fledgling government are definitely not going to dismiss it knowing that their monetary aid from denmark is going to be weened off and although the country does have other resources, there is a negligible amount of mining going on at present and no other co. as forward as GGG to begin paying the state royalties.

good luck all the LT holders


----------



## exgeo (10 June 2009)

If "they have it" but haven't yet released it, they are breaking listing rule 3.1 aren't they? (continuous disclosure obligation to the ASX). Doesn't sound very astute to me. I hold this stock.


----------



## Luciano (10 June 2009)

Yes, it wouldn't be astute. I would think that the MD didn't wish to have the contents of his private conversation broadcast all over the net! 

Um er, did I do that?

Or perhaps they were still putting some finishing touches to it, and could've rushed it out to counter the political uncertainty of the past week, but decided to wait until they had all their i's dotted and t's crossed. 

On the other hand, there could be doubt. But on HC today the dude confirmed the converstion. He said according to the conversation, he expects Friday next or maybe early the week after, coz he thinks MD's are often late or something tongue in cheek like that.


----------



## Randoi (10 June 2009)

Hi all, can someone give me some good links for up-to-date news from Greenland. Most of what I manage to Google is a few days old and never goes in to much detail about the developing political situation. I even tried to chase up some of the election policies etc... to no avail. I got in a while ago at .23 and jumped last week at .43 but am now reconsidering.... oh the stress of guesswork


----------



## Luciano (13 June 2009)

Motzfeldt: Self-rule government should first
address raw materials

By Mads Dollerup-Scheibel

The former premier said that management of Greenland's raw
materials was the key to its future success.

Jonathan Motzfeldt danced the night away with the rest of the Siumut Party contingency at Discotheque Heat on Tuesday evening after it was clear Greenland was headed for self-rule.

'I'm just so happy and incredibly satisfied,' said the former premier. 'I've waited 30 years for this and
I'm just glad that the voter turnout was so high. It shows that the nation stands behind the "yes" vote.'

During the course of the evening's well-wishes and handshakes, Motzfeldt also managed to voice his
ideas on what the first political milestone should be for the new self-rule government.

'If it was up to me, then I think we should first take a deep breath and then get the country stabilised.
And the first area to take care of in that respect is raw materials,' said Motzfeldt.

'We have to have full responsibility for that area and now we have the legal right to it. Then we have
to determine how to get the most out of those resources economically for Greenland,' he said.
Udskriv
Sermitsiaq.gl - FÃ¸rste omrÃ¥de bliver rÃ¥stoffet Page 1 of 1
http://


----------



## Luciano (13 June 2009)

From HC:

For what is the worlds second biggest REE deposit and top 5 uranium deposits plus the Sodium Fluoride, current in ground value is well over 40 bill before the resource upgrade. Current undiluted market cap is around 80 mill with roughly 10 mill in the bak and absolutely no need for capital raising. Fully diluted market cap is around 160 mill but the co would then have over 50 mill in cash aswell.

( NAF is used to make artificial cryolite that is used as a flux in aluminum smelting, and has numerous other industrial applications including glass manufacturing. Initial investigations by the company suggest that a relatively low-purity NaF product is valued at approximately $1,000 (USD) per tonne. Coincidentally, Alcoa are building the world’s largest
aluminium smelter in Greenland and as such are an obvious potential buyer of the NaF.

Points of note are:
1. Kvanefjeld is now recognised as one of the largest known occurrences of Rare Earth Oxides (REO) in the world and with the incorporation of results from the large 2008 field program, I expect it to move to the largest. Within the same ore body is a very large uranium resource, and vast resource of sodium fluoride.

2. Greenland is a first world OECD country that is embracing natural resource development as the foundation of its future economy. With Greenland moving to further independence from Denmark, Greenland’s government has stated that the development of large natural resource projects will be a high priority to help facilitate
the path to independence.

3. Following a parliamentary debate in late November, 2008, Greenland announced inprinciple support for by-product uranium production. The Company considers this as a huge vote of confidence for the future of the Kvanefjeld project from Greenland’s authorities.

4. The project is 8kms from a town with deepwater ports open all year with an international airport nearby and the potential to utilise hydroelectric power for the mining and ore processing.

Why Greenland?
Greenland is highly prospective yet underexplored. It is politically stable, maintains a longlived
democracy and tax system, and is mining friendly, yet there is also a high level of
unemployment. The Greenland Home Rule Government recognises that the responsible
development of mineral resources is critical to the future economy of Greenland. This was
emphasised at the Greenland Sustainable Energy Conference in Copenhagen in May 2008
at which GGG was lead sponsor. Many of the world’s leading oil and gas and mining companies such as Rio Tinto, Quadra and Esso have recognised the potential of Greenland and secured licenses.


----------



## Luciano (18 June 2009)

From mining news. 

Closing price should be .445, or up 3.5%, not .40 and down 7%!

Bit of a schitzo day.... so glad I was at work and not watching the SP plummet like that! Hit a low of .385 not long after the news came out, before shooting up again to hit .47 and back to .445. ANyways, apart stopping a whole bunch of traders out, no damage done! ANd if they were quick, they could've gotten back into it anyway! Me, I'm into this for the long term. GGGO it is for me! .255, up 6.2% Hopefully come 2011 the world has been degeared enough and stable enough to support nice prices for that 85% upgrade of the Rare Earths to 4.91Mt! That's the big fish in the pond of this one. With China controlling and restricting access to REs, as it does, the prices could be very good in the future.

Good luck to all holders!


Greenland ups Kvanefjeld resource

Kristie Batten
Thursday, 18 June 2009

GREENLAND Minerals & Energy has announced a substantial increase in resources at its Kvanefjeld project in Greenland, with rare earth oxide resources boosted by 88%.

Kvanefjeld now has an indicated and inferred resource of 457 million tonnes grading 0.3% uranium oxide, 1.07% total rare earth oxide and 0.22% zinc using a cut-off of 0.1% uranium oxide.

The deposit contains 4.91Mt of total rare earth oxide, 990,000 tonnes of zinc, 120,000t of uranium oxide and 3.09Mt of sodium fluoride.

Of the new resource estimate, 79% of the rare earth oxide resources are in the indicated category.

The previous resource estimate was 334Mt at 0.03% uranium oxide, inclusive of 215Mt at 1.21% rare earth oxide and 201Mt at 1.1% sodium fluoride.

The company said the updated resource estimate confirms Kvanefjeld as one of the world’s largest rare earth resources in the world.

A prefeasibility study is underway at Kvanefjeld, which is scheduled for completion in the third quarter.

Preliminary metallurgical testwork has confirmed the suitability of an alkaline leach recovery operation.

Last year Greenland Minerals & Energy spent $A16.2 million on drilling and environmental studies at Kvanefjeld.

Shares in Greenland Minerals & Energy were 7% or 3c down today to 40c.


----------



## Luciano (21 June 2009)

This may help GGG get a mining licence?

From HC

So, we have fiscal pressure on our side, and a wishy washy leftist led coalition against on this one... (not that I'm against lefty govts myself per se.... just this one for obvious reasons!) which will win out?


The new government of Greenland has inherited a difficult financial situation from its predecessors, with bankruptcy as a real and present danger.

The IA-led coalition government, which took over from the former Siumut-led coalition following national elections on 2 June, is already facing its first real threat, as it is alleged that the country is on the verge of emptying its coffers, mainly due to subsidies granted to Home Rule-owned companies such as Royal Greenland, and according to an article in Danish newspaper Berlingske Tidende, Greenland could be bankrupt as early as 2010.

In order to ensure sufficient liquidity for the national economy and to secure the continued efficient running of the country and its 17 publicly owned companies, politicians could be forced to go cap in hand for loans from foreign banks by 2010.

The information comes from an anonymous source within the Home Rule administration who has insight into Greenland’s finances.

The newly elected government have nevertheless confirmed that publicly owned Royal Greenland will be rescued from its current financial difficulties with a cash injection of 500 million kroner, but possibly as much as 650 million kroner.

With this payment to Royal Greenland the national finances, which currently stand at 2 billion kroner, will begin to be dangerously drained, with a very real risk of being empty by as early as 2012.

Home Rule authorities had already budgeted for a deficit of 300 million kroner. In addition, the previous Siumut-led government earmarked as much as 300 million kroner for hydroelectric power projects in the towns of Ilulissat and Sisimiut.

The payment to Royal Greenland, together with the planned budget deficit and hydroelectric project funding, total almost half of the country’s national finances.

That could leave the treasury with just over one billion kroner in reserves by next year, and would put the country at a serious risk of seeing its finances dropping below what is regarded by politicians and economists in Greenland as an important minimum reserve credit of 600 million kroner.

As soon as the country’s reserves drop below 600 million kroner, there may be little alternative for the government than to take out expensive foreign loans, which are often accompanied by high interest rates that worsen the already difficult situation.

However, Christen SÃ¸rensen, chairman of the advisory committee for Greenland, put doubt on the seriousness of the situation.

‘With finances of about two billion kroner the Home Rule Government is in a position of good liquidity,’ said SÃ¸rensen.

But the real question is for how long. 



http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8111292.stm

The Arctic island of Greenland is assuming self-rule, in the latest step towards independence from Denmark.

The move follows a referendum on greater autonomy in November. It will see Greenland take a greater share of revenues from its natural resources.

The local government is taking control of the police and the courts. Greenlandic - or Kalaallisut - becomes the official language.

Denmark has the final say in defence and foreign-policy matters.

Copenhagen has ruled Greenland for three centuries. It granted the territory limited sovereignty in 1979.

But the new self-rule system takes the Arctic island and its 57,000 inhabitants closer to independence.

Greenlanders - most of whom are native Inuit - will be treated as a separate people under international law.

Prime Minister Kuupik Kleist
Greenland Prime Minister Kleist has promised to focus on social problems

Much of the oil, gas, gold and diamonds the island holds has been inaccessible because of the Arctic ice covering most of the land mass.

But US experts believe it will become easier to exploit the island's mineral wealth as global warming melts the ice sheets.

Independence advocates hope the expected increase in revenues from minerals will help fund a final breakaway from Copenhagen.

But analysts say any push for independence is likely to be put on the backburner by Greenland's new leftist government.

Newly elected Prime Minister Kuupik Kleist has vowed to concentrate on tackling big social problems, such as alcoholism, domestic violence and a high suicide rate.

Greenland currently relies heavily on subsidies from the Danish government - which provide 30% of its GDP.


----------



## JnrTrader (22 June 2009)

45c is the key level for ggg and my graphing shows a decline is coming, maybe a pullback to around 36c is likely, but i like this stock, loads of potential in medium term


----------



## Luciano (23 June 2009)

Very prophetic JnrTrader! Just half a cent out at 36.5! Absolutely smashed today. Word is that management will be meeting the govt this week, so we may have some indication of how things will play out comes weeks end. My bet is that U mining is disallowed, but the RE is allowed. Only prob is that the minerals are mixed in together... "whereever we put our shovels, we hit Uranium". So maybe they'll have to mine the stuff, then store it somewhere and then put it back or something... which sounds problematic. Hopefully there'll be some rumours one can latch onto or even an announcement come weeks end. One thing's for certain though, with $50 billion bucks of RE's not to mention large deposits of Sodium Flouride and Zinc (oh, and U ), if the political uncertainty is cleared up, then expect this one to rocket! Watch this space!


----------



## Luciano (24 June 2009)

In a trading halt now until Thursday open or announcement earlier to clarify this article. Note it is not clear whether this is just the minister's opinion, or definite Govt policy. Maybe if certain conditions could be met, the project could go ahead. Anyway, we'll find out soon enough. Word is that the company chair is meeting the PM on Thursday. 

Latest blow to Uranium project

Government say no to uranium development in Narsaq (Photo: John Rasmussen)

Uranium mine proposal near the town of Narsaq is given the thumbs down, but the government says it is open to potential uranium development projects
By Kurt Kristensen

A proposed uranium mine on Kvane Mountain has been turned down by Ove Karl Berthelsen, minister for commerce and raw materials, due to its proximity to the town of Narsaq, western Greenland.

‘Kvane Mountain is situated so closely to Narsaq that we simply can’t run the risk of radioactive pollution as the result of uranium mining, even as a by-product,’ said Berthelsen.

The new government has made it clear that it will not approve the project due to safety concerns, but said that the decision did not indicate it was unwilling to consider uranium by-product mining.

This represents a clear change of political stance towards radioactive materials from the new IA-led coalition government, and moves it away from the previous zero-tolerance policy implemented by the Siumut-led government in 1988.

The government’s coalition agreement states that it is willing to consider the development of non-living natural resources, but not at the cost of the environment.

‘This means that we are willing to consider the development of uranium as a by-product, subject to certain conditions,’ said Berthelsen.

He pointed out that any uranium mined must be a by-product, and that there would have to be assurances that any uranium mined in Greenland was not used in the weapons industry.

However, Berthelsen said that with so much mineral wealth potential in Greenland in the form of molybdenum, zinc, iron, gold and diamonds, to name but a few, there was no need to rush to pass any uranium-mining policy changes.

‘Let’s concentrate on opening these mines first, allowing us the necessary time required to evaluate the development if uranium,’ said Berthelsen, who also pointed to the potential 1,500 jobs that mineral development could create in the country


----------



## JnrTrader (24 June 2009)

wasnt expecting it to fall to my target that very day luciano but things are not looking as good as they were for ggg.With regards to your previous post, that the gov may not allow U mining from ggg flagship project, this has been the issue all along for ggg and for many many years now they just cant seem to get this project up and running


----------



## Luciano (25 June 2009)

GGG now suspended until further notice. Make or Break time I would think! Here's a slightly different article:

http://sermitsiaq.gl/erhverv/article88231.ece?lang=EN

"Plans for a mine at Kvane Mountain could turn out to be more about providing green energy solutions than the risks of radioactive pollution"

New estimates have indicated that Kvane Mountain is rich in Rare Earth Oxides (REO), such as zinc, uranium oxide and natrium fluoride.

REO present on Kvane Mountain can be used in strategically important super alloys, which are used to making turbine blades in gas generators and other green technologies. They are also of vital importance to the electronic industry, which utilises them in computers, mobile telephones and navigation equipment.

It is calculated that Kvane Mountain contains almost five million tonnes of REO, including nearly a million tonnes of zinc, 120,000 tonnes of uranium oxide and three million tonnes of natrium fluoride.

However, a proposed uranium mine on Kvane Mountain has been turned down by Ove Karl Berthelsen, minister for commerce and raw materials, due to its proximity to the town of Narsaq, western Greenland.

‘Kvane Mountain is situated so close to Narsaq that we simply can’t run the risk of radioactive pollution as the result of uranium mining, even as a by-product,’ said Berthelsen.

The new government has made it clear that it will not approve the project due to safety concerns, but said that the decision did not indicate it was unwilling to consider uranium by-product mining.

Now Greenland Mining and Energy have released a statement indicating that their application is in fact not for uranium, but for REO mining, with the necessary consequence of uranium being mined as a by-product due to its presence in the mountain.


----------



## fast fate (25 June 2009)

Meeting in Perth today - voting allows more money & share allotments to directors ???

And still no announcement !!!
Trading still in Suspension !!!

Surely this will not go down well with shareholders.
Glad I got out the other day before the Trading Halt application went through.
Still holding small allotment BUT wish I wasn't !!

Can only hope that announcement has some amazing news - if announcement ever arrives !!


----------



## the barry (25 June 2009)

fast fate said:


> Meeting in Perth today - voting allows more money & share allotments to directors ???
> 
> And still no announcement !!!
> Trading still in Suspension !!!
> ...




Why would this go down badly with shareholders? Its not up to them to make the announcement. Could be days, weeks. Get a clue.


----------



## kgee (27 June 2009)

What a Debacle!
A ministers gone ahead and said no to the project and an environmental impact study hasn't been completed nor has a request for a mining permit been issued by GGG

And yet its seems the govt will give the go ahead to Alcoa's (?) aluminium smelter....effectivley doubling Greenlands CO2 emmissions
You think these guy's might have heard about melting polar caps????

and Uranium from what I gather isn't the boogey monster it once was...its relativeley safe to mine and no CO2 emmissions

WTF!!!!

I'm thinking back to FNT and the Kokoda Track mess
and I'm thinking not again
well that and church towers / sniper rifles
or clubbing a seal


----------



## Luciano (28 June 2009)

Ah ha Kgee.... but hang on! Perhaps there's hope after all!


http://www.knr.gl/index.php?id=183&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=46103&tx_ttnews[backPid]=143&cHash=877c51f442

Google Translation:

Thursday 25. June 2009 17:44

Zero tolerance for uranium to be changed, if it stands in the way of resource development in Greenland, says Business Forum in Kujalleq.

Business Forum in Kujalleq feel the urgency of environmental studies that could pave the way for mining activities in Kvanefjeldet by Narsaq. The three business presidents in Narsaq, Qaqortoq and Nanortalik strongly dissatisfied with the new Greenland controlled uranium restrictive policy.
- Zero-tolerance is to be changed, if it stands in the way of resource development in Greenland, says business forum chairman Narsaq, Ib Lauersen.
- People must be able to take a position on mining in Kvanefjeldet based on facts and science, and not from politicians immediate thoughts. Mining and quarrying is a fantastic opportunity that should be examined thoroughly before you say no, says the Ib Lauersen.
Ib Lauersen has not even concerns about mining in Kvanefjeldet.
- I trust the scientists from RisÃ¸ and National Environmental Research Institute, who worked with her for many years.


----------



## Luciano (1 July 2009)

Former PM of Greenland, Lars-Emil Johensen has just been appointed the new CEO of GGG!


From tomorrow joins Lars-Emil Johansen as new CEO of the Australian-owned Greenland Minerals and Energy A / S, writes AG today.


Lars-Emil Johansen. Arkivfoto.

My company will extract metals in Kvanefjeldet in Narsaq, which is only possible in a contentious biproduktion uranium.

- When I went into this work, it is because I want to help the PA hits a real substance. Kvanefjeldet contains the largest collection of rare earth metals that are used in high technology. At best, Kvanefjeldet contain minerals that will provide work for the next three generations, and major economic benefits for the country. But first there are only issued a preliminary permit, "says Lars-Emil Johansen AG.


Here's what Wikipedia has to say on our man:

Lars Emil Johansen (born 24 September 1946) was the second Prime Minister of Greenland, serving from 1991 to 1997.
Johansen was chairman of the political party Siumut (Forward) between 1987 and 1997, seated in the Landsting from its creation in 1979. Prior to the creation of the Landsting, he represented Greenland in the Danish Folketing from 1973, a position he regained in 2001 and still holds.
He was born in Illorsuit, a small settlement near Uummannaq in the Qaasuitsup municipality.
In 1970, Johansen finished his education as a teacher, and the following year he was elected for the Greenland country council, the most powerful local authority in Greenland prior to the creation of the Landsting.
He has been rewarded with the Danish Order of the Dannebrog and the Royal Norwegian Order of Merit, as well as two types of the Nersornaat, the silver Nersornaat and the golden Nersornaat (the Greenland Medal for Meritorious Service).


----------



## kgee (2 July 2009)

Possible good news 
From Sermitsiaq
http://sermitsiaq.gl/erhverv/article88845.ece?lang=EN

Denmark has been allotted a carbon dioxide quota of 2.2 million tonnes to cover gas and oil extraction in the North Sea, while Greenland has not been allotted a single tonne. 

This could spell trouble for a planned Alcoa aluminium works in Greenland. The works are projected to emit 612,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year. Oil exploration requires a minimum of one two million tonne emission quota. 

Connie Hedegaard, Denmark’s climate minister, spoke with Greenland’s national broadcaster KNR, to whom she was unable to explain the apparent disparity, but said she would be discussing the matter with Premier Kuupik Kleist and developing a good dialogue over the coming months. 

I wonder how it feels when the shoe is on the other foot?
If there's delays with Alcoa's project surely that puts a new light on Kvanefjeld.
Fingers crossed
Hey Lucciano where did you find the info on this new appointment of a CEO been looking can't find much


----------



## antzlovinit (3 July 2009)

*No free CO2 allowances to Greenland*

Finally got 5 posts up!
http://sermitsiaq.gl/indland/article89170.ece?lang=EN (language in danish but google translated)

KNR writes that Greenland has had the opportunity to seek free CO2 quotas so that after 2012 do not have to buy as much CO2 allowances.  KNR argues further that, because the EU law, all countries reach an agreement with the EU, making it possible to apply for free CO2 allowances. This is not true, writes Landsstyre President's Department in a press release. 

The first misconception is that you can already get agreement on CO2 quotas after 2012. The current Kyoto Protocol expires in 2012, there is no agreement on quotas for 2012. CO2 allowances and reduction targets after 2012 is what is currently under negotiation with a view to concluding an agreement in December 2012 in Copenhagen. 

The next misconception is that the Greenland and other countries can apply for frikvoter mid-Kyoto period. Denmark ratified the Kyoto protocol in 2002 without qualifying for Greenland. This means that Denmark and other countries under the Protocol are obliged to reduce its CO2 emissions by 2012. 

Greenland has produced a framework agreement with Denmark to Greenland also actively seek to reduce its CO2 emissions compared to 1990 levels. 

This means that Denmark and Greenland before the expiry of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012 may not be searching for new free allowances. 

It also follows from the framework agreement to be negotiated if Greenland before the first commitment period 2008-2012 to establish industrial and production of oil, gas and / or minerals. 

Greenland has secured the necessary framework for CO2 emissions for industrial development up to 2012. Right now must be negotiated limits after 2012. 

Hope negotiations go well!


----------



## careca (7 July 2009)

*ggg*

Does anybody have any news ( the latest on GGG shares) what is the latest re Greenlangs government decision on  uranium mining.


----------



## pops11 (7 July 2009)

Check out HotCopper site for more info on GGG the general info is to hold as so far most of the talk has just been by the papers and one cetain person not the GOVT as a whole.


----------



## careca (7 July 2009)

thanks pops11
I have been in the dark on this , I Can't believe that the Government won't allow this to proceed  it would bring a great source of income the country as a whole not to mention the creation of jobs


----------



## J.B.Nimble (7 July 2009)

pops11 said:


> Check out HotCopper site for more info on GGG the general info is to hold as so far most of the talk has just been by the papers and one cetain person not the GOVT as a whole.





Hey pops, don't underestimate this... with a population of 57,564 and a parliament of 31 members, you are looking at small town politics. Cripes, this is only one rung up the political ladder from being on a PTA committee... Small town reality - you don't have to be the mayor to hold sway over the population. 
:karaoke::iagree::iagree::iagree::bier:

Your one certain person could wield considerable influence whether in government or not. Don't underestimate it...


----------



## antzlovinit (8 July 2009)

It's true what luciano said on the 1st July.

Article came out on 2nd July..
http://66.102.11.132/translate_c?hl...le.com&usg=ALkJrhjKU4ptdRLfEfOJZOoyyX5gfnOVSA 

Lars-Emil Johansen has accepted a position as chairman of Greenland Minerals and Energy, despite still being one of Greenland's two representatives in the Danish parliament. 

The move is a controversial one given Premier Kuupik Kleist's recent statement that his new coalition government under IA will maintain the country's 30-year-old zero-tolerance towards uranium mining. 

'I shall of course be attentive to the company's interests, but I am also a Green Lander, as is the company's director, "said Johansen. 'So another essential task is to ensure that any eventual extraction of rare earth oxides is carried out in both an environmentally and health and safety conscious manner.'


----------



## Luciano (8 July 2009)

Sure is. And looks like the move may backfire! 



Conflict of interest concerns surround leading politician

MP takes on another role as board chairman for an Australian company hoping to extract uranium in Greenland

By Kurt Kristensen

Lars-Emil Johansen has accepted a position as chairman of Greenland Minerals and Energy, despite still being one of Greenland’s two representatives in the Danish parliament.

The move is a controversial one given Premier Kuupik Kleist’s recent statement that his new IA-led coalition government will maintain the country’s 30-year-old zero-tolerance towards uranium mining.

‘I shall of course be attentive to the company’s interests, but I am also a Greenlander, as is the company’s director,’ said Johansen. ‘So another essential task is to ensure that any eventual extraction of rare earth oxides is carried out in both an environmentally and health and safety conscious manner.’

Australian-owned Greenland Minerals and Energy, which has been in the headlines recently due to reported investment losses of up to 100 million kroner, had initially pinned its hopes on a change of Greenland’s uranium mining policy.

However, any certainty that both parliament and government would give the green light to extracting uranium as a by-product was swept away together with former government party Siumut after the 2 June national elections, meaning that the understanding between the mineral company and the Siumut/Atassut government no longer stands.

A parliamentary majority, consisting of then-government coalition partners Siumut and Atassut together with Demokraatit, had came out in support of the company’s proposed mining project on Kvane Mountain, near the town of Narsaq in eastern Greenland, during parliament’s 2008 autumn session.

Johansen denied having broken any rules when asked by Danish newspaper ‘Information’ if he was guilty of mixing politics and personal economic interests.

‘I am simply using my free time to occupy myself with what I want to, and no, I do not think it constitutes a conflict of interests,’ said Johansen. ‘I am just trying to give the new Self-Rule Greenland a reliable income.’

Criticism of Johansen’s acceptance of the position has already been voiced by political commentators, among them Lars Hovbaake SÃ¸rsensen, an expert in Greenlandic politics at Denmark’s Aarhus University.

SÃ¸rensen pointed out that the appointment represented the very sort of political action that lost Siumut June’s general election. That election saw IA, Demokraatit and KP parties surge to power on the back of an anti-corruption campaign.

One of the three founding fathers of Siumut, the political party that ruled Greenland from Home Rule’s inception in 1979 until last month’s devastating election, Johansen is one of Greenland’s most experienced political figures.

During a political career that has spanned over three decades, Johansen served as premier from 1991-1997, and has represented Greenland in the Danish parliament from 1973-1979 and again since 2001.


----------



## pops11 (8 July 2009)

Sorry mate new ANN out and she's all go as before but now with new team members and from local people with influence so GGG is back on track and looking pretty sweet so all your bad news work has not worked for my mind.


----------



## Luciano (9 July 2009)

Mate, All I've been doing is keeping y'all up to date with what's been going on, whether the news is good or bad. I've got 10% of my portfolio in GGG/GGGO, so I've certainly got nothing to gain in downramping my stock. I just tell it how it is, so others can make well informed decisions on GGG.

Will be interesting to see how it goes when the suspension is lifted, maybe in a few days time. Could be a good buying opportunity coming! Certainly there appears to be good reason to keep an eye on this stock. GGG are pulling out all the stops to get this project up, and if they succeed, there may be huge returns in the offing to courageous investors 

Here's the announcement

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20090708/pdf/31jh09hmh0nhb0.pdf


----------



## pops11 (9 July 2009)

Fair call. Good luck to you then and as for me i have alot more than 10% stake so you could see why im more into reading good news to bad but in saying that i have been following this stock nad news on many channels not just here.


----------



## the barry (10 July 2009)

Hey all,

article in the afr on ggg. 

Worth a read, looks good and we should have news in the coming days.


----------



## White_Knight (11 July 2009)

Crossed fingers and optimism dont stop you from losing a lot of money. 

Hell...holders might get lucky, but i'm glad to be out of this stock right now until all this crap is resolved.


----------



## kgee (13 July 2009)

Well the price held up pretty well considering.
Really like the look of the new board and the appointment of Former PM of Greenland, Lars-Emil Johensen.
He looks like a good man to have in the trenches
and it's going to be a battle to get the go ahead.....be nice to get approval around about the time the feasibility study comes out
Oh what happy days they would be

Rods talking on Boardroom Radio
http://www.brr.com.au/event/58774/kvanefjeld-rare-earths-project

even if it's a low % deposit it's still looking like a behemoth
Good luck to everyone


----------



## enigmatic (16 July 2009)

I may be of on some tangent here but i was looking over a few new REO projects and you have a few out obviously the demand is there.

Nolans - 848kt meas+ind+inf (2012)
Mt Weld - 1.184Mt meas+ind+inf (2012)
Dubbo Zirconia - 545kt meas+inf (2011/2012)
Hoidas Lake - 36kt ind (2012/2013)
Thor Lake - 1.428Mt ind+inf (2013)
*Kvanefjeld - 4.79Mt ( Unknown)*

This is just a stab in the dark but that looks a whole lot bigger then the rest of the up and comers.. I been following the Nolan project and Mt Weld and I'm a little surprised at the amount of REO although this doesn't indicate Good value offcourse that all depends on what REO is in the ground...

I know currently the relative REE value for 
Mountain Pass - $7.54USD/kg
Bao Tou - $8.22USD/kg
Mt Weld - $9.75USD/kg
Nolans -  $10.05USD/kg

so even if this one has similar to Mountain pass... with 457Mt resource thats a few Billion dollars..
Might have to follow this one more closely seems its all up to the Greenland government.


----------



## antzlovinit (27 July 2009)

great on the orange light and the sp will prob keep fallin until the greenlight. Thats if there will be a greenlight. I think greenland should approve this project as it will provide the country with so much more, yet environmental issues wont allow it. Only one project which is the kvanfield, hmm if all fails what will happen, delist from asx? 

When is the summit in copenhagen?


----------



## antzlovinit (27 July 2009)

What companies are in these projects?

Nolans 
Mt Weld 
Dubbo Zirconia 
Hoidas Lake 
Thor Lake


----------



## exgeo (27 July 2009)

> What companies are in these projects?
> 
> Nolans
> Mt Weld
> ...




Your google must be broken. Nolans = Arafura ARU, Mt Weld = Lynas LYC, Dubbo = Alkane ALK for starters..


----------



## PrKalkyl (28 July 2009)

Greenland are going to have some new neighbors, four new Nuclear power plant in Nunavut, Arctic Canada not far from Greenlands border, mining industri needs a lot of power.

see: sermitsiaq.gl

Perhaps you need to use google to translate.

GLTA


----------



## PrKalkyl (28 July 2009)

Not so much goes Greenlands way (IA) right now, they are not aloud to sell any products from seals within EU anymore, the seal-industry is very important for there economy. I think they have to look for other possibilities.

They also have a big tap in the tourist-industry

sermitsiaq.gl/politik/article85055.ece
(I'm not aloud to insert links)

GLTA


----------



## pops11 (19 August 2009)

*GGG*

Nice little jump today plus volume up well also...maybe an ANN coming before to long with some luck, all the best for holders, i hold.


----------



## Knobby22 (19 August 2009)

*Re: GGG*

Gee that's a vague spruik.

No details, no info, wishing best of luck and there maybe an announcement?

Try and do better next time.


----------



## PrKalkyl (20 August 2009)

Look at this could be the reason, Thorium is the future for NuclearPower, AREVA has pumped in a lot of money in Thorium Power, Ticker THPW.OB
Greenland hasn ´t even put a value on this!
Kvanefjeld is a GIANT in all ways

(sermitsiaq.gl/indland/article93851.ece)


----------



## PrKalkyl (25 August 2009)

Look at this article under title 3,
Hope they change there minds, Kvanefjeld is huge, perhaps we have a new miniggiant soon.



(http://sermitsiaq.gl/rss/en_newsletter.jsp)

GLTA


----------



## pops11 (25 August 2009)

Good spotting and agree GGG could be huge by the look of this article.

.......................................

A bedrock in southern Greenland contains has one of the vast deposits of radioactive material. 
By Erik Holmsgaard 

Kvanefjeldet by Narsaq in southern Greenland is an energy bomb. Not only does the bedrock contain vast amounts of uranium, it has been discovered that it holds one of the world's largest deposits of the radioactive material thorium 

Geology professor Henning SÃ¸rensen said the material contained a huge amount of energy. 

‘In the thorium deposits alone, there is more energy than in the remaining oil reserves in the world,’ SÃ¸rensen said. 

He described the amount of energy deposits in area surrounding Kvanefjeldet as ‘astronomical’. 

Converting thorium into energy still hasn’t been done, but according to SÃ¸rensen, only ‘technical issues’ were preventing that from happening. 

Kvanefjeldet’s wealth has long been a contentious political issue. So far, the dispute has centred on whether utilizing the uranium should be permitted. 

At the forthcoming autumn session of parliament, opposition party Siumut will try to create a majority for a proposal to create border values, allowing the uranium to be mined and used as a by-product. 

Already, an agreement has been made in principle to accept uranium as a by-product of mining, when the ore contains more than 0.1 percent uranium oxide. 

Party leader Aleqa Hammond said Siumut now wanted a concrete agreement to set the border values, otherwise the development of natural resources could not in progress. 

‘Until we have determined the border values, resource development will not reach the level we want.’ 

Hammond said natural resources were crucial to Greenland's economic independence. 

‘Independence can be achieved by using the raw material extraction. With the self-rule, it is now up to us to achieve complete autonomy,’ she said


----------



## antzlovinit (26 August 2009)

Whats with the huge upswing! surely theres something going on! not everyone reads (http://sermitsiaq.gl/rss/en_newsletter.jsp) that article. Maybe the climate change meeting might have some positive results for us or something. Anyone know anything.


----------



## pops11 (26 August 2009)

Well i posted the news yesterday so hope you got on i did good luck to holders this is going to be an interesting stock for here on in.


----------



## quarky (27 August 2009)

Greenlands Minerals and Energy: UraniumLetter places $1.20 share price target

Uraniumletter International Update and Comment:

Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd.
Share Price: A$ 0.50
ASX : GGG
H+L prices (12 months) : A$ 0.55 – 0.15
Net issued shares : 218.5 million
Fully diluted : 387.1 million
Market capitalization : A$ 109.2 million
Fully diluted : A$ 193.5 million
(at an exercise price of A$ 0.20)
Next price target: A$ 1.20

"Greenland Minerals & Energy (ASX: GGG) has secured to acquire 61%, with options to acquire up to 100% of the Kvanefjeld Project on the southwest tip of Greenland and is recognised as the second largest undeveloped multi-element occurrences of rare earth oxides (beryllium and lithium), sodium fluoride and uranium in the world.

Particularly since having further increased and upgraded in size, the Kvanefjeld Project, with an estimated JORC compliant resource of 120,000 tonnes U3O8 grading 283 ppm, containing 223 million pounds of U3O8 (192 million pounds at 350 ppm), can be compared with Rio Tinto’s producing Rossing Uranium Mine in Namibia containing a current 174,000 tonnes Mine resource grading 300 ppm for 470 million pounds of U3O8.

Actually, apart from the Kvanefjeld Project being the world’s second largest REO project, Greenland Minerals owns one of the world’s top-5 uranium deposits. The present U3O8 resource represents a value of less than US$ 1.00 per pound (fully diluted), compared with average resource valuations in the uranium sector between US$ 3 to US$ 5 per pound U3O8.

While Greenland Minerals under an improving geopolitical climate has the potential to emerge to a multibillion dollar uranium company alone, the financial world has not recognised the Company having emerged in just two years to one of the world’s leading rare earth companies yet.

Early indications are that uranium represents approximately a quarter of the total in the ground value of the Kvanefjeld Project, to be estimated at more than US$ 40 billion.

The Company’s focus in 2009 shifts from resource development to metallurgical test work and other aspects of a pre-feasibility study scheduled to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2009, for which a budget of A$5 million has been allocated.

In addition, a budget of A$ 3-4 million is slated for ongoing exploration.

With the recent positive political developments in Greenland, having activated self-rule in June and getting 100% control of its mineral rights, the future is looking very positive for Greenland Minerals.

A national debate is planned to decide the future of uranium production. A positive decision could multiply the Company’s market valuation right away.

Based on the huge economic value of the Kvanefjeld Project, we view Greenland Minerals as one of the most attractive investment opportunities in the global rare earth and uranium industry.

Our next price objective is: A$ 1.20."


----------



## pops11 (29 August 2009)

*GGG Rod McIllree*

Rod McIllree has joined HotCopper to give correct info for releases so to stop speculation which will br fantastic for us holders and the Company alike.


----------



## pops11 (1 September 2009)

*GGG*

New York times business page of today September 1, top article China's grip on REE's make for some great reading and good for GGG


----------



## quarky (2 September 2009)

*Re: GGG*



pops11 said:


> New York times business page of today September 1, top article China's grip on REE's make for some great reading and good for GGG




good find, *pops11*.

it _is_ a good read


but i'm just worried about a pullback in the share-price, due to Greenland government's zero-tolerance with uranium mining but a lot more about GGG depends on the pre-feasibility study due out later this year.

(currently holding GGG)​


----------



## kgee (26 September 2009)

I'm not a chartist but does this look like a head and shoulders formation? if so would 28c be the buy back in?
sorry not sure how to post chart


----------



## kgee (30 September 2009)

Sifting thru the news…the god the bad the curious


In review of the Narsaq town meeting on 3/9/09

Source:
http://www.knr.gl/index.php?id=297&...48098&tx_ttnews[backPid]=844&cHash=5dea9b85ac

(Naalakkersuisut = new coalition government)

Naalakkersuisut considers it important that people be consulted on such an important a topic as exploration and exploitation of uranium-containing minerals. It struck Naalakkersuisoq (cabinet member, Ed.) For the Mining Area, Karl Ove Berthelsen solid during his speech during the public meeting yesterday Wednesday in Narsaq hall. 

Although today is not permitted to exploit minerals that have higher uranium content than normal background radiation, he sees an opportunity for policy change in the future. In this case the local population to ensure participation, when we talk about potential mining projects involving uranium, he said. 

During the public meeting on uranium in Narsaq yesterday there were many listeners, who spoke for and against the opening of uranium mines in Greenland. One of the speakers was Naalakkersuisoq of Mining Area Karl Ove Berthelsen. 

- I want to hear all views and I think we should give us ample time to immerse ourselves in the subject. The final decision on efterfoskning and exploitation of uranium-containing minerals may be taken on an informed basis and must ultimately be based on objectivity and societal concerns. The current uranium policy in Greenland doing it today is not permitted to exploit minerals that have higher uranium content than normal background radiation. It also means that some mining projects could not be completed because of the high content of uranium. Otherwise there will be other mining projects that could be implemented within zero tolerance, says Karl Ove Berthelsen. 

Naalakkersuisut established after the elections on 24 June common policy. 

- We are three parties in the coalition (Inuit Ataqatigiit, Demokraatit and Kattusseqatigiit Partiiat, ed.), And we must obviously find a policy which we can all join us. So far we have jointly announced that the policy on uranium is unchanged, meaning that zero-tolerance policy remains in force, "he continued. 

It is therefore Naalakkersuisut position that the public debate which was promised in connection with Inatsisartut processing of uranium-statement must be undertaken with the country's entire population. And public meeting in Narsaq was just a start. 

- Local people must be guaranteed participation, when we talk about potential mining projects involving uranium, he said. 

Running for and against the debate on the possible reopening of the mine in Kvanefjeld. Has yet taken a position. It is a requirement of the Mining law - and future - that all mining activity will be safety, sanitary and environmentally sound manner and in accordance with best international practice. This means that at least 2-3 years before my start to be compiled extensive environmental studies. Any mining uranium as main or product will require additional precautions. 

- It's Naalakkersuisut position that we should use the coming year to implement an effective participation of its citizens in decision making in this important community area. It means that I will hold meetings with citizens in many parts of the country in 2009 and 2010, and I want to clarify that there are decisions taken in the near future - it should not be worried, he concludes, and look forward to a good debate throughout the country in the coming months. 

Good News: 
Karl Ove Berthelsen the Minister for Industry and Mineral Resources of the Inuit Ataqatigiit  party ( who historically have been against uranium mining) seems objective about the idea of mining uranium as a bi-product… “…we are willing to consider the development of uranium as a by-product, subject to certain conditions," said Berthelsen. 


Bad News: 
He seems to have a 2-3 year time frame on any decision….” Berthelsen said that with so much mineral wealth potential in Greenland in the form of molybdenum, zinc, iron, gold and diamonds, to name but a few, there was no need to rush to pass any uranium-mining policy changes. "Let’s concentrate on opening these mines first, allowing us the necessary time required to evaluate the development if uranium,"””

The Curious:  
“and I want to clarify that there are decisions taken in the near future - it should not be worried, he concludes”
Have had a little difficulty translating Danish to English but I’m curious as to what these decisions in the near future are
Possibly 1. Berthelsen quote “ - As the law now is, can not be extended as much as a single gram of uranium. But The Cabinet will shortly come up with a blueprint for amending the law. And when that happens, people will be consulted if and when a change is made.”
Or 2. “At the forthcoming autumn session of parliament, opposition party Siumut will try to create a majority for a proposal to create border values, allowing the uranium to be mined and used as a by-product. “

Other Curiosities 
In 2008” A majority in parliament agreed to support the extraction of uranium as a by-product from mines where other minerals are the primary target. Siumut, Atassut and the Democrats all support easing the country's 20-year-old 'zero tolerance' policy regarding uranium mining. Inuit Ataqatigiit and Kattusseqatigiit are both opposed to the proposal. (Sermitsiaq avis Nov. 27, 2008)”

Now the democrats are in coalition with Ataqatigiit even though last year they voted in favour for uranium mining as a by product.

The break down of current govt.

Inuit Ataqatigiit  14 seats
Siumut             9
Demokraatic        4
Atassut            3
Kattuseeqatigiit   1

Now if the parties all followed the same lines as last year we get

Inuit Ataqatigiit  14 seat
Kattuseeqatigiit   1

For 15 votes against uranium…and

Siumut             9
Demokraatic        4
Atassut            3

16 votes for uranium

Note: That’s a pretty big IF !!!

Other Sources


http://avativutnunavut.blogspot.com/
http://www.sikunews.com/art.html?catid=6&artid=6571

http://www.knr.gl/index.php?id=183&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=48098&tx_ttnews[backPid]=143&cHash=47cd23e01b

http://www.knr.gl/index.php?id=183&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=48108&tx_ttnews[backPid]=143&cHash=d28bba882b

http://sermitsiaq.gl/erhverv/article95662.ece


----------



## antzlovinit (1 October 2009)

kgee said:


> Sifting thru the news…the god the bad the curious
> 
> 
> In review of the Narsaq town meeting on 3/9/09
> ...




Im watching this stock and i could see it dropping to its lows again in time as
im guessing production to commence in 2015-2020!


----------



## kgee (1 November 2009)

Could be an interesting month.

The last few announcements from GGG have carried the footnote

"Any potential change toward the current stance of zero tolerance (uranium) is not expected untill after public consultation and review process is concluded in the coming months"

From memory parliament runs untill the 25th of Nov. So there should be decisions on

1. Siumut's proposal to create border values, allowing the uranium to be mined and used as a by-product. “
2.Minister of mines Berthelsen's  "blueprint for amending the law.” (see above post)

Also note one member of parliament switched parties from Inuit Ataqatigiit  to siumut So now if we goto vote along old party lines it goes 17 to 14 in favour.
Again Big If !!!!

Please note I'm doing a lot of speculating, its difficult in both getting new's out of Greenland and then translating it to english.
Goodluck to all holders


----------



## jancha (6 January 2010)

kgee said:


> Could be an interesting month.
> 
> The last few announcements from GGG have carried the footnote
> 
> ...




Don't need translate anything with GGG atm. 
Just look at the buyers lining up with practically no sellers.
Looks like they must have got it thru parliament.


----------



## kgee (6 January 2010)

No... it seems Parliament are in no hurry to change the present ban on uranium...I'm guessing a decison b4 the end of the year, At the AGM it was suggested they might allow GGG a trial period, which I didn't like the sound of... Capex will be huge and I couldn't imagine any JV would be happy with a trial? (Although when you think of it all mines are on trial...)

The PFS is out later this month so I'm thinking this is more likley the reason for the increase.

Of note there was a reverse head and shoulders formation that didn't break the neck at 64 c... its done that now and with Westrip ( major shareholder) reducing there holdings...I see that as a positive sign and still think it should run some more

2nd note GGG's maket cap is approx the same of BNM and GGG have a bigger resource and better grades of uranium + 4.9 mt of REO
Problem being the uranium ban...but once this is lifted ( and I think they will) you can see GGG has some potential,
 just how long it takes to get there????

PS. I've also got a feeling it will be pump and dump on the PFS so have my finger on the trigger


----------



## kgee (22 January 2010)

If anyones got some spare time check out
http://www.ggg.gl/
They have a couple of new  video presentations that I thought were quite good (located just beneath share price display)
maybe skip the intro  (was a little naff), but the project overview was ok
PFS out by end of month???


----------



## condog (24 January 2010)

This stock has massive potential, but its hard to see the govt changing there stance on 0 tolerance....they have been a huge public critic of uranium for many years.....

I guess at least there putting it to discussion...which is a huge positive sign....

A possible compromise where the uranium is stockpiled for future use is on the cards, and id imagine its the least valuable commodity they have....  thats probalby unheard of, perhaps someone can enlighten us on that prospect...

If it does manage to come out poositive the upside is astronomical for the quantity of rare earths....

Good luck...all holders....Im sitting on the sidelines watching with a lot of interest for a while...may join you someday...


----------



## exgeo (3 March 2010)

From Minesite.com

March 02, 2010

Greenland Minerals Confirms That It Is On Course For A Full London Listing And A £40 Million Raise Early Next Year
By Alastair Ford



It’s now official. Greenland Minerals & Energy will list on the full board of the London stock exchange in the early part of next year. The brokers will be Evolution, and one other, yet to be appointed, though Greenland managing director Rod McIllree says he’s currently in advanced talks on that front. The decision to move straight onto the full list is a bold one, given that there have been precious few new mining listings on the LSE proper for a year now. But the Aim market is beginning to loosen up, and already there have been a few new arrivals this year. As the global economy gradually recovers its poise, and demand stabilizes, there’ll no doubt be a few more.
But if Greenland’s decision to go straight onto the main market is a sign that economic conditions continue to improve for the miners, it’s also a reflection of the company’s own ambitions. The company’s key asset is the Kvanefjeld rare earth and uranium project in Greenland. As at the latest resource update, compiled last year, Kvanefjeld contains, on a mid-case scenario that uses a 0.02% U3O8 cut-off, 339 million tonnes of ore grading 0.032% U3O8, 1.14% total rare earth oxide (TREO), and 0.23% zinc. That’s not small potatoes, and the money that’s required to get it into production isn’t small potatoes either – US$2.3 billion at the last count. This is definitely big board stuff, so the company’s decision to sidestep Aim completely at this stage makes perfect sense – a listing there would just add to the bureaucratic side of things, without providing a secure enough platform for growth. 

The company recently completed a pre-feasibility study, which has allowed it to hang some hard numbers on what was previously little more than a theoretical undertaking. Perhaps the most eye catching figure was the projected cashflow. At US$500 million per year, you can see why Rod McIllree is reasonably confident that Greenland Minerals will, in due course, be able to attract a major into the project to provide a significant portion of the funding. Payback could come within a matter of five years or so, which isn’t too bad on a multi-billion dollar project. The next step now will be to complete a full feasibility study, and that will include the construction of a pilot plant. For a project this size that’s essential, as what happens under laboratory conditions isn’t always the same as what will happen out there under the relatively extreme meteorological conditions of Greenland. 

In the meantime, for anyone wondering about the viability of a uranium and rare earths project in a jurisdiction that hasn’t yet quite made up its mind about uranium mining, and in a global market for rare earths which is opaque to say the least, there’s some comfort to be had in the company’s latest board appointment. Michael Hutchinson has served as chairman and director of the London Metal Exchange, and was also a director of Wogen, a speciality trader in what’s termed “off-exchange” metals, of which the rare earth elements are prime examples. 

And, on an administrative level, Michael Hutchinson’s appointment is just the first in a series of planned steps that will gradually see the company migrating from the current home base of Australia into Europe. There’ll be a new office in Copenhagen, and the management team is moving over to London later this year. That, says Rod, is pure pragmatism. There was only so long a multi-billion dollar project in Greenland could be managed out of Perth. It was alright at the conceptual stage, but as the reality of an actual mine draws ever closer, a more hands-on approach at the local level is required. 

Rod’s also hopeful that the Greenland government itself will help the company in its quest to reduce the perceived risk of operating over there. It’s not always been easy for companies to make a go of things out in Greenland, and not only from a meteorological perspective. In any case, Greenland Minerals isn’t not at the sharp end of Greenland’s weather extremes by any means, nestled as it is almost as close to the south of the country as it’s possible to go. It’s not weather that’s the cause of the perceived “Greenland risk”, but uncertainty about the government’s stance on mining. Lately, though, things have been running in favour of the resources sector. The government has recently passed a new Mineral Resources Act, and this, reckons Rod, should make things much easier, although full oil and mineral rights have yet to pass completely out of the control of the Danish government. 

All told, it may yet be five years before first production comes rolling out of Kvanefjeld, and that’s on a reasonably optimistic scenario. But it’ll be an interesting one to follow from a London perspective, not least because there’ll no doubt be a concerted drive to push the value of the company on the Aussie stock exchange ahead of its listing in London. Under that scenario, canny UK investors will have plenty of time to phone their brokers Down Under to buy in ahead of the pack


----------



## Sean K (7 September 2010)

Not sure what's going on here.

Anyone still owning / following?

*Greenland Minerals falls as zero-tolerance threatens Kvanefjeld *
Robin Bromby From: The Australian September 07, 2010 

Greenland Minerals and Energy emerged from a trading halt this morning, and at the time of writing, its shares had shed nearly 9.5 per cent of value.

It seems there are still doubts about its Kvanefjeld project because of its uranium content. GGG reported today that a letter from Greenland’s Mineral Resources Minister confirmed that the government there had retained its zero-tolerance policy toward the mining of uranium.

This is a problem because it raises doubts whether GGG could go ahead and mine the rare earths elements that have become so vital to the future of the project. However, the government will allow exploration work to continue - and the letter did leave wiggle-room for some slight policy relaxation.


----------



## enigmatic (9 September 2010)

*In the mean time all personnel are now preparing to return to Perth and the exploration program has been completed.* A further update on the program will be made in due course
following receipt of assays.

Kennas i think this announcement said it all on the 23/08/10
there pulling out for now until something changes..
no good for the share price


----------



## mr. jeff (10 September 2010)

hi everybody, saw this thread for the first time the other day, sounds very interesting...thought I would be the one to post the great news for holders.

excerpt from The Australian 10/09/10 (today)

_GREENLAND Minerals and Energy soared more than 75 per cent today after the Greenland government made a key regulatory change. 

The Perth-based company welcomed news that Greenland’s government had amended the standard terms for exploration licences, which will allow it to develop its flagship Kvanefjeld project for its rare earth elements, uranium and zinc.

Greenland Minerals said it can now commit to definitive feasibility studies in 2011, as planned, after the decades-old ban on uranium mining was essentially lifted._
How does this bode? Looks like GGG may now be let off leash? thoughts?


----------



## benwex (11 September 2010)

Hello there,

I have been thinking about GGG now post a favourable decision for the Uranium mining in Greenland.

But I do want to draw attention to the ridiculous number of options which expire in 9 months.

There are 168,632,047 options @ $0.20 expiring at 30 June 2011. This compares to a 222,508,555 fully paid ordinary shares as of September 2009 (last annual report).

This dilution will have a massive affect on the share price. 

Does anyone else share my fears? the timing of information now till option expire will be interesting to say the least..

I hate that I am so cynical.

Benwex


----------



## mlchua (13 September 2010)

benwex said:


> Hello there,
> There are 168,632,047 options @ $0.20 expiring at 30 June 2011. This compares to a 222,508,555 fully paid ordinary shares as of September 2009 (last annual report).
> 
> This dilution will have a massive affect on the share price.




Interesting point... Can someone explain the consequence of this when the time comes?
Basically if 2/3rd of GGG's issued shares would be bought cheaply by option holders at a much cheaper price than the trading price, thus *must* the company then issue additional shares to cover the options, thus almost doubling the amount of shares floating around and basically drop the price by half?


----------



## enigmatic (19 October 2010)

It does seem that it would drop the price by half. 

I actually was wondering if anyone had a reason behind the sudden spike in price up 24% so far today. I was expecting this share to go quiet for the next year until exploring started up again.

any thoughts.


----------



## kgee (19 October 2010)

Haven't followed GGG in a while, the rumour mill always runs with this one.
I know Greenland Govt comes together over Nov/Dec to vote on various stuff so....
And on the subject of share dilution I think the option's money has being allocated to buy out the remaining share of the project...I think currently they own 67%?


----------



## thestevo888 (19 October 2010)

kgee said:


> Haven't followed GGG in a while, the rumour mill always runs with this one.
> I know Greenland Govt comes together over Nov/Dec to vote on various stuff so....
> And on the subject of share dilution I think the option's money has being allocated to buy out the remaining share of the project...I think currently they own 67%?




So are you saying that it's not going to be an issue re: the sp falling if options are exercised?


----------



## kgee (19 October 2010)

Well it definitley would be a plus for them to have 100% ownership of Kvanefeld...I think the legal case with them and Westrip over ownership is still going on.
I no longer hold this stock,(I should have held on I had a stack of options at average 8 cents) but if I remember correctly it was going to cost another 60 million for full ownership?
Share dilution is always a problem, but maybe it will be offset with the 100% ownership, it depends on what you think the project is worth.
The in-situ valuation is huge but the grades are low, and the mineraology complex and of course Greenlands stance on Uranium needs to be clarified!
But my thoughts on the matter were this could stand up as a Uranium project all on it's own the REE's were always the icing on the top


----------



## exgeo (19 October 2010)

> The in-situ valuation is huge but the grades are low, and the mineraology complex




Going by the presentation of 19/5/2010 from Northern Uranium NTU, the value of REO at Kvanefeld is between that of Nolans Bore (ARU) and Mt Weld (LYC). I assume this is the value of the concentrate produced after processing, not the in-situ value of a tonne of rock though. I also remember reading (in The Australian I think) that Kvanefeld is relatively enriched in the higher-value heavy rare earths.

It seems Westrip is gradually selling down their stake in GGG. Must be regretting it today, given the runup in the SP lately!


----------



## ashwints (24 October 2010)

does anyone see the price of this stock appreciating over the coming weeks?


----------



## flee (29 October 2010)

Massive price drop since their high of almost $1.10. Seems everybody has jumped off the bandwagon.


----------



## MEGALADON (29 October 2010)

While their project has huge upside potential depending on actual uranium resource and how the politics pan out, they are also listed in the top 20 shareholders for Riviera Resources (RVE) which is due to re list shortly after acquiring a substantial Iron Ore project in Brazil "South American Ferro Metals Ltd".


----------



## exgeo (16 November 2010)

Since the beginning of October, 20m new shares have been issued because of the excercise of various options. The outstanding shares are now 270m. Makes good sense to excercise the option at 20c or 50c and then sell on the market for the current price of 80 or 90c. This can't have helped the share price recently.


----------



## DAVIDB75 (14 December 2010)

approval to 'fully evaluate' in Greenland has been obtained - not sure how significant this approval is but it must be a big step forward.


----------



## gland (4 January 2011)

lots to wonder about here .The company claims to own 100% others claim its 61% but dont worry thats in court for a couple of years
Company claims right to uranium,Greenland government states in press release no rights to explore or exploit.
Company even makes claims to others ground.
Company seams to not want to talk about the option situation


----------



## Market Depth (4 January 2011)

I took an aggressive postion on GGG on the 23rd of Dec, @0.95, knowing about the option issue. And closed the postion today at $1.35, it's been trading in an irregular way on the market depth and that didn't sit well with me.


----------



## exgeo (4 January 2011)

gland said:


> lots to wonder about here .The company claims to own 100% others claim its 61% but dont worry thats in court for a couple of years
> Company claims right to uranium,Greenland government states in press release no rights to explore or exploit.




Gland, you're almost right. On page 33 or GGG's 9th Sept 2010 presentation, it says the company owns 61%, Westrip owns 39% of the project. GGG may move to 100% by issuing shares or cash to Westrip. This agreement does not expire. Westrip also owns nearly 19% of the shares in GGG.

The 14th Dec 2010 announcement from GGG entitled "Approval to evaluate uranium at Kvanefjeld" I suppose is self explanatory. Not approval to exploit yet, but seems the Greenland govt are moving in that direction. Hardly surprising seeing as there is little industry in Greenland currently.


----------



## gland (6 January 2011)

to ex geo government greenland in press release states no one has right to explore or exploit uranium so thats clearly out of the picture and should not be used in any cash flow.As for the other the drums are quite loud ggg only owns no more than 61% something about ggg ending the jv.Interested to see a company comment on this , but this company seams veryslow to release bad news.For example they still include uranium in their cash flow when it is not even included in their licence and have not told the market this deverstating news.


----------



## exgeo (6 January 2011)

gland said:


> to ex geo government greenland in press release states no one has right to explore or exploit uranium so thats clearly out of the picture and should not be used in any cash flow.As for the other the drums are quite loud ggg only owns no more than 61% something about ggg ending the jv.Interested to see a company comment on this , but this company seams veryslow to release bad news.For example they still include uranium in their cash flow when it is not even included in their licence and have not told the market this deverstating news.




This note appears at the bottom of most of GGG's market-releases - right after the bit that says "About Greenland Minerals & Energy". The text changed a bit after discussions with the Greenland govt (which was reported in the paper at the time and resulted in a large jump in GGG's share price



> Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd is aware of and respects the Greenlandic government stance on uranium exploration and development in Greenland – which is currently a zero tolerance approach to the exploitation of uranium. However, a new amendment has now been introduced to license terms in Greenland that creates a framework for the evaluation and permitting of projects that contain uranium.




New version. Text changed after the 14th Dec announcement. I have bolded the new text:


> Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd is aware of and respects the Greenlandic government’s stance on uranium exploration and development in Greenland – which is currently a zero tolerance approach. However, a new amendment has been introduced to the standard terms for exploration licenses in Greenland that creates a framework for the evaluation of projects that include uranium amongst other economic elements. *Within this framework the Company is permitted to fully evaluate the Kvanefjeld project, inclusive of radioactive elements.*




Granted, this does not yet allow them to exploit Uranium, only explore for it.


----------



## gland (8 January 2011)

to ex geo you seam to have this quite wrong the government announcement is quite clear,ggg does not have the right to EXPLORE or exploit uranium.The so called changes were designed for those unfortunate people who had say a gold mine with say some thorium to be able to assess the enviromental and social impacts of that only, of them unfortunatly having a radioactive element present in their ore.
 Secondly like much of the world the ggg licence does not include oil, if they wish to explore for oil they would have to lodge an application.Uranium is the same it is not and can be on the same licence,and the government is not taking applications for uranium licences, which is fortunate for ggg because if they were i am sure one of the more efficent locals would get their application in first.


----------



## jonojpsg (8 January 2011)

mlchua said:


> Interesting point... Can someone explain the consequence of this when the time comes?
> Basically if 2/3rd of GGG's issued shares would be bought cheaply by option holders at a much cheaper price than the trading price, thus *must* the company then issue additional shares to cover the options, thus almost doubling the amount of shares floating around and basically drop the price by half?




Doesn't necessarily mean that price will drop by half even though there will be twice the shares on issue, just means the market capitilisation will double if the SP remains the same. 

 Although if I was a shareholder and could buy shares at 20c then sell them at $1.30 straight up, I would be doing whatever it took to get the money to do so.  Obviously if everyone holding options has the same idea it means that there would be a lot more people willing to sell, most likely at prices from 80c? up - that's a stab in the dark of course, but if you can make 4x your money or 3x your money or 5x your money it makes little difference given that it's a no risk situation.

Certainly would make trading over the next six months till options expiry less certain - I would think hard about buying at current levels given that situation.  

I don't hold and am not planning to at this stage.


----------



## gland (11 January 2011)

you appear to be right as in two days some 14 million options have been converted.As the rumour is these were controlled by freinds of the company and no substancial shareholder notices have been lodged does this mean they are being dumped into this market. :


----------



## jbocker (17 March 2011)

Been a fair drop in price for GGG last few days. Has this been due to the most recent comments on this site (release of options) or following general market sentiment or the overall 'no to uranium', albeit GGG is more about rare earths. 
From what I can make of the deposits is it has been the reluctance to mine because of the uranium that has held back development. Japans tragedy wrt its Fukushima nuclear power plant is not going to help.
Could see the price stagnate for a while. Any thoughts.

I dont hold.


----------



## gland (26 March 2011)

Reading other sites it looks like this company is in trouble in greenland with the government anyone got any info on this.


----------



## Simpson (13 April 2011)

I'm no expert, but it seems that GGG had made a few assumptions about the Government's stance on their proposition, and the probability and ease of which it could be swayed. I read that the Greenland Government didn't exactly "fire back" at GGG, but reaffirmed their position on uranium mining as being one of no tolerance. This was around the time of the initial nuclear crisis in Japan. GGG has since being flapping about in the water at 90c to $1.
Still watching closely on this one though. The potential is great.


----------



## gland (26 April 2011)

Simpson appears its disaster in greenland after the company made a dreadful mistake of sending a cd and newspaper to every house in greenland 5 days after Japan explaining why every greenlander had to have a uranium min;the goverment took the un precedented step of releasing an press statement stating greenland minerals statement was misleading and there was a ZERO TOLLERANCE TO URANIUM EXPLORATION.
 I now see one of their directors on the local company has resigned in protest at the companies actions.The company still appears to be run by people who dont think before they act,as a result they clearly have lost any possible PR campain in that country.Pity as the project appears to be good.


----------



## Simpson (7 June 2011)

GGG has sent out the voting packet for the EGM called by Westrip Holdings to remove certain directors from the board and replace them. Some being replaced by members from Westrip which would give Westrip control. Moreover, Westrip is currently suing GGG. Does anyone have an opinion on this and care to share it? It seems there is a lot of hot water surrounding the whole thing. From the bagging out of the Westrip candidates in the letter from GGG, it seems we'd be replacing dodgy directors with dodgy directors.


----------



## Pager (29 October 2013)

Greenland*Minerals*and*Energy*Limited*(“GMEL”*or*“the*Company”)*is*pleased*to*advise*that*on*
Thursday*24th*October,*Greenland’s*parliament*voted*in*favour*of*removing*a*long‐standing*zero‐
tolerance*policy*concerning*uranium*and*other*radioactive*elements*(“the*zero‐tolerance*policy”).*
This*landmark*decision*represents*a*significant*moment*for*Greenland,*as*it*places*Greenland*on*the*
path*to*uranium‐producer*status,*and*thereby*opens*up*coincident*resources*of*rare*earth*elements*
to*exploitation.*The*removal*of*the*zero‐tolerance*policy*is*in*alignment*with*Greenland’s*broader*
intent*to*develop*mining*projects*as*a*core*to*its*future*economic*prosperity.*

Sorry about the text, its a C&P, not sure whats happened but the jist of the post is there


----------



## pixel (29 October 2013)

Easier to post a link to the pdf that's published on the ASX website:

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20131025/pdf/42kbgmh73mp4g5.pdf

Of course, a chart is also helpful 





I'm concerned about yesterday's gap-up. Shall wait for it to be closed - maybe bid 32?


----------



## pixel (4 November 2013)

32c was still too much (I pulled that bid unexecuted)
However, we seem to have found support at the 1-year EMA, and I'm starting to buy some back today.


----------



## pixel (14 May 2015)

Judging by recent announcements and presentations, including today's http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displayAnnouncement.do?display=pdf&idsId=01625222 elaborate slides, it seems that GGG's plans are becoming socially and politically more acceptable.
It was only that report that got me to bring up GGG's chart again - and I like the shape of it.




Volume has picked up of late, and a Flag pattern has formed above the mid-level of the recent trading range. If Fib level 61.8% holds, a breakout from the flag should offer some lucrative trading opportunities. Alert set.


----------



## pixel (6 February 2017)

That flag was quickly taken down. 
A 12 months long "Saucer" pattern followed, leading to a breakout.
The latest pullback closed the earlier gap and appears to have found support.






I'm taking another punt and have started to build a Long position. Still: Speccie Rules.


----------



## pixel (13 February 2017)

taking a different Fibonacci view, based on a saucer pattern.





This view suggests the next resistance at 17c and blue sky beyond.
For now, I hold, to wait and see if today's break out of the D-box is likely to continue and take out 17c as well.


----------



## pixel (13 February 2017)

weekly chart:


----------



## System (14 June 2018)

On June 14th, 2018, Greenland Minerals and Energy Limited changed its name to Greenland Minerals Limited.


----------



## greggles (17 October 2018)

Big move for Greenland Minerals this week, rising from 7.8c on Monday to 10c today. 

Last Thursday the company announced that the Greenland Government has affirmed its committed support for rare earth and associated uranium production following a coalition adjustment. However, I see no other catalyst for the share price movement over the last few days.

Perhaps that was enough? Although it was a little odd that the GGG share price did not start moving until Monday.


----------



## jbocker (19 October 2018)

From their latest report...
*https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20181011/pdf/43z4v3htv31nzt.pdf*

_Official acceptance of a mining license application and public consultation requires submission of the  EIA, SIA and the Maritime Safety Study in Greenlandic and Danish. 
Translations of the Maritime Safety Study and the SIA are complete. Translations of the EIA are  scheduled for completion by the end of October
_
After a long process of compiling reviewing and updating these reports I think we are closer to a step change in momentum to get these massive resources off the ground. The governments have been positive on development. I think there will be a lot more news and activity and hopefully positive reaction with the shares. That is why I pick it in the November stock competition.


----------



## jbocker (22 October 2018)

Announcement out today, mentions further project optimisation in engineering design requirements, specifically in civil works where there is 80% reduction in cut requirements and >60% in fill requirements from in their 2016 Feasibility study. Impressive improvement I would think.
While that may truly be 'ground-breaking' not so with the share price today.


----------



## jbocker (17 February 2019)

I picked this for the March 2019 tipping comp.
Reason. A punt. When will we see some rubber on the road. Some feedback from all the updated and amended reports. I am guessing that as we lead towards the northern summer some activity may eventuate.
 Oh, am I repeating detail in comment #136....


----------



## jbocker (2 April 2019)

Public report SIA (Social Impact Assessment) has been released late last week


----------



## jbocker (26 April 2019)

GGG have their AGM on the 31st of May, and I am banking on them making some fabulous announcement that bangs the share price through the roof and I win the May tipping comp.

But please do your own research and don't act on my advice on this matter. OK?


----------



## jbocker (15 May 2019)

GGG make announcement today of further improvements in the feasibility studies of mining. That's good news.
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20190515/pdf/4453f67t8s65r1.pdf
Well I waiting on that big announcement at the end of month at the AGM, so that I can win the tipping comp.


----------



## jbocker (21 May 2019)

I am going to start believing my own press (including the BS). Something might have jumped out of the bag and its run off down the street. UP 34% today. Is there something afoot?


----------



## jbocker (31 May 2019)

The presentation at the AGM today.
It is a BIG Rare Earth Resource promising to be a low cost operation. MotleyFool says the share price uplift over the last 2 months is due to US/China trade conflict impacts on RE pricing, and the reported improved mining efficiencies in the feasibility studies.
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20190531/pdf/445hxzkghpgcd0.pdf


----------



## jbocker (13 December 2019)

I am picking this in the 2020 competition (and win the $1000 prizemoney)

Rare Earths, a massive resource, been known for a loooong time but uranium has been holding it back, due to conservative approach in Greenland and Norway. Has undergone extensive studies and reviews the governments have become favourable and I think its getting close to a mining grant. With that hopefully triggers a growth in share price. It is my PUNT pick.


----------



## jbocker (13 December 2019)

Sorry previous post should have read Denmark _not Norway._
The Danish government historically oversaw Greenland.


----------



## fergee (29 December 2019)

GGG looking like it might be good play for the next couple of years as rare earth sector pivots away from chinese supply.


----------



## jbocker (30 December 2019)

fergee said:


> GGG looking like it might be good play for the next couple of years as rare earth sector pivots away from chinese supply.



Largest shareholder is a Chinese company (Shenghe Resources) with extensive Rare Earth experience. Far from a controlling interest but (in my tiny brain) I do wonder if they may strategically lock up the huge resource along with all of Chinas RE resources. 
I also wonder if down the track a big bun fight for a controlling number of GGG shares plays out by NON Chinese interests once a mining grant  is issued or after any other significant milestone.


----------



## frugal.rock (30 December 2019)

fergee said:


> GGG looking like it might be good play for the next couple of years as rare earth sector pivots away from chinese supply.



Is the sector pivoting away from China... OR the reverse?
One needs to understand the rationale, why plunder your own country first?
Not to mention, there is no rush for the end game...
Might be far from a controlling interest, but who, what, when and where will the product be processed etc?
The truest "controlling interest" is the buyer, yeah?
F.Rock


----------



## fergee (30 December 2019)

jbocker said:


> Largest shareholder is a Chinese company (Shenghe Resources) with extensive Rare Earth experience. Far from a controlling interest but (in my tiny brain) I do wonder if they may strategically lock up the huge resource along with all of Chinas RE resources.
> I also wonder if down the track a big bun fight for a controlling number of GGG shares plays out by NON Chinese interests once a mining grant  is issued or after any other significant milestone.




I didn't realise that its major shareholder was a Chinese firm, I haven't been following this company very closely, to be honest. Your bun fight rational over control of this resource between China and the West makes logical sense. Interesting how Trump tweeted out he was keen to buy Greenland not long back could be a signal there about Greenlands true economic/strategic value.


----------



## fergee (30 December 2019)

frugal.rock said:


> Is the sector pivoting away from China... OR the reverse?
> One needs to understand the rationale, why plunder your own country first?
> Not to mention, there is no rush for the end game...
> Might be far from a controlling interest, but who, what, when and where will the product be processed etc?
> ...




Smart play would be to hold reserves for future use in safe jurisdictions, for China that's inside China itself. For the US that could be in any NATO, ANZUS or trusted ally country. The truest controlling interest is not always the buyer because it would depend on the elasticity of the product and how supply is managed. In this case the sellers (80% Chinese controlled companies essentially controlled by the CCP) probably hold a stronger hand than the buyers due to rare earths being so strategically important hence why China can potentially wield this as a stick in future trade disputes.


----------



## jbocker (30 December 2019)

frugal.rock said:


> The truest "controlling interest" is the buyer, yeah?



In the majority of cases yes. But if you hold all the goodies, you get to shop around the buyers. Not saying this is the case here with Rare Earths (yet).



frugal.rock said:


> who, what, when and where will the product be processed etc



Good billions of dollars questions! Interesting recent questions being played out with Lynas Corporation (LYC)


----------



## jbocker (30 December 2019)

fergee said:


> Interesting how Trump tweeted out he was keen to buy Greenland not long back could be a signal there about Greenlands true economic/strategic value



Do you know when that was? There was a uplift in GGG pricing April May/June this year and has maintained an elevated level since.


----------



## fergee (30 December 2019)

jbocker said:


> Do you know when that was? There was a uplift in GGG pricing April May/June this year and has maintained an elevated level since.



It was in August. I wonder if the elevation is due to market sentiment stemming from the trade dispute between US and China?


----------



## fergee (30 December 2019)

Sorry, the elevation obviously is from the trade dispute. A better question would be why is it still elevated now that trade talks are making progress and China has dropped a whole bunch of tariffs? Does the market not believe it? Or is it because the Pentagon is now interested, possibly investing in, the rare earth sector in Canada, AUS and other friendly nations?


----------



## VERUS8 (12 February 2020)

The REE sector is rife with mum and dad speculators who jump on any “positive” news that is portrayed bt the “media”. It’s an opaque sector with dozens of speculative companies vying for more cash to keep the doors open for longer hoping, dreaming that the “Rare Earth boom” form 2011 will see similar prices revisited again. 
The REE sector and the remaining listed companies should be viewed as a short term investment when the news flow is positive IMO. Hardest part is picking the right time to invest. 
As for GGG, I don’t believe the companies glossies about cost savings and lowest cost producer. It’s all smoke and mirrors to make the project sound good to potential investors. Just look at the prices used for “credits” that have been applied to reduce COP numbers to a level they can then claim to be lowest cost producer out of any non developed REE companies. It’s a disgrace IMO.


----------



## jbocker (12 February 2020)

VERUS8 said:


> Just look at the prices used for “credits” that have been applied to reduce COP numbers to a level they can then claim to be lowest cost producer out of any non developed REE companies. It’s a disgrace IMO.



As a miserable mum and dad 'speculator' I would be happy for the enlightenment, of what is specifically wrong with the numbers. It is difficult to know what to believe from those glossies.


----------



## VERUS8 (12 February 2020)

jbocker said:


> As a miserable mum and dad 'speculator' I would be happy for the enlightenment, of what is specifically wrong with the numbers. It is difficult to know what to believe from those glossies.



"As a miserable mum and dad 'speculator'" Most of us are 

If you have a read of the companies optimised feasibility update dated 15.05.19 you will notice it mentions in the highlits "Unit costs reduced to <$US4/Kg of rare earth oxide, net of by-product credits".

Scroll down to p.3 and under the table "Average annual by-product output includes:" you will find the prices assumed for by-product credits are: U3O8 US$40/lb, zinc concentrate US$1000/t, fluorspar US$400/t.

https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/GGG/02105750.pdf

Current spot price,
U3O8 US$24.55 https://markets.businessinsider.com/commodities/uranium-price

Without knowing the grades of zinc concentrate or fluorspar it is difficult to find an accurate price for the zinc concentrate and fluorspar but based on the U3O8 price im sure they would be extremely inflated. GGG should just come clean with the REO cost of production rather than applying "credits".

The improvements made on the companies feasibility study results are unbelievable. The company engaged experts to conduct pilot plant trails, study the results and then produce the data for the feasibility study. Either the experts they engaged were extremely incompetent or the optimised feasibility results are too good to be true. I would pick the latter.


----------



## jbocker (13 February 2020)

VERUS8 said:


> Without knowing the grades of zinc concentrate or fluorspar it is difficult to find an accurate price for the zinc concentrate and fluorspar but based on the U3O8 price im sure they would be extremely inflated. GGG should just come clean with the REO cost of production rather than applying "credits".



Thinking about this gives me headaches, but I wonder if since it is an update have they kept the original values of the 'credits' and is that justifiable? I agree the simple REO production cost would be simpler, but I wonder if the credits are valid to quote as other mines would likely place their specific credits also. (Excuse me while I take a Panadol).
In reality it is the U3O8 that has kept the REO from being mined in the first place, and why there has been extensive studies required along with political rethinking.


----------



## VERUS8 (13 February 2020)

jbocker said:


> Thinking about this gives me headaches, but I wonder if since it is an update have they kept the original values of the 'credits' and is that justifiable? I agree the simple REO production cost would be simpler, but I wonder if the credits are valid to quote as other mines would likely place their specific credits also. (Excuse me while I take a Panadol).
> In reality it is the U3O8 that has kept the REO from being mined in the first place, and why there has been extensive studies required along with political rethinking.



The feasibility study was released in 2015 and the credits were as follows:
U3O8 - US$70/LB 
Zinc - US$1000/t
CaF2 (Calcium Fluoride) - US$350/t
They also included Cerium Ce and Lanthanum La as by-products/credits
Ce - US$5/Kg
La - US$6.5/Kg

I have a feeling the by product prices are based on higher purity products then what GGG will actually be producing. Take the Cerium and Lanthanum as an example. They have used a separated oxide price for each as a by product credit, when the reality is they will only be producing a mixed concentrate which sells for substantially less. They would be lucky to get $1/Kg for a mixed Ce/La concentrate. Not only that the prices for the separated oxides they have used are inflated by 200% of what they actually were at the time. Can understand they have forecast the prices at the time in 2015 to what they believe prices would be in 2019 using Adams Intelligence reports, but as we all know those prices where no where near accurate.  

If you look at table 26 of the feasibility study on p.29, all prices for rare earths they have used to calculate project revenue are 100-200% more than what they actually sell for not only back then but today as well. 

Its a complete and utter scam, every junior REE exploration company is the same. Never believe any of the details released by the company when it comes to project feasibility and of course DYOR. 

Link to Feasibility Study:
https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/GGG/01627899.pdf


----------



## jbocker (5 August 2020)

Been some activity and rise in SP in recent times, maybe the interest in the company is increasing with  anticipation of approvals and potential grant of a lease for mining ??


----------



## VERUS8 (16 August 2020)

jbocker said:


> Been some activity and rise in SP in recent times, maybe the interest in the company is increasing with  anticipation of approvals and potential grant of a lease for mining ??



Looks like speculators have piled into this one. Personally I don’t believe the company will receive an exploitation license within the next year, could take longer, seeing their EIA has yet to be accepted IMO. 
Still many years away before this company can start mining and that’s if the approvals process goes smoothly IMO. Investors beware.


----------



## VERUS8 (16 August 2020)

VERUS8 said:


> Looks like speculators have piled into this one. Personally I don’t believe the company will receive an exploitation license within the next year, could take longer, seeing their EIA has yet to be accepted IMO.
> Still many years away before this company can start mining and that’s if the approvals process goes smoothly IMO. Investors beware.



To be honest, the SP action of late has no relevance to whether or not the company receives approvals. It’s purely based on speculation that it will. Just need to keep in mind what might happen if the approvals are not forthcoming and have a plan to act accordingly because as quickly as the speculators arrive they can disappear.


----------



## jbocker (24 August 2020)

VERUS8 said:


> To be honest, the SP action of late has no relevance to whether or not the company receives approvals. It’s purely based on speculation that it will. Just need to keep in mind what might happen if the approvals are not forthcoming and have a plan to act accordingly because as quickly as the speculators arrive they can disappear.




'tis speculation
anticipation   trepidation   expectation
p  r  o  c  r  a  s  t  i  n  a  t  i  o  n
Wholly ****   degradation   tribulation   devastation
Holy ****   aggregation   multiplication   jubilation
Admiration   self indulgent adulation
celebration   reputation 
'twas built this   bonzer Nation
'tis   speculation


----------



## Dona Ferentes (21 September 2020)

concatenation


> Trading Halt .... pending an announcement on the progress of the approval, by the Greenland government of the Company’s Environmental Impact Assessment.


----------



## jbocker (24 September 2020)

Been watching this one for a number of years. Finally GGG  have Acceptance of the EIA by the Greenland Environmental Agency for Mineral Resource Activities. This has been a VERY long road and to get that acceptance must be a very significant milestone. 


			https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20200923/pdf/44mx5csmxts3n2.pdf


----------



## Dona Ferentes (23 November 2020)

Good run, 10c to 30c in four months.

Trading halt

Capital raising.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (23 November 2020)

looking for $30 million via a placement of new shares and a share purchase plan to raise up to $3 million, according to terms sent out.

The new shares were being offered to investors at *24¢ each*, which represented a 17.2 per cent discount to Greenland's last close and an 18 per cent discount to its ten day VWAP.

Canaccord Genuity was lead manager on the deal, while CPS Capital Group and Ashanti Capital were pitching in as co managers.


----------



## jbocker (27 December 2020)

This is one of my selections for the 2021 tipping Competition. It has been a slow moving beast, but I suspect 2021 will be good year for GGG. The EIA has been accepted for public consultation and the 12 week consultation has commenced. I would think this should be the start of a year of a mining grant and some significant groundwork activity.
(not holding)


----------



## greggles (31 December 2020)

I think GGG is going to outperform in 2021and it is my top pick for the full year 2021 competition.

Their REE project is huge with a JORC-code compliant resource of >1 billion tonnes, and an ore reserve estimate of 108 million tonnes to sustain an initial 37-year mine life.

I am anticipating that rare earth elements will only continue to increase in value during 2021 and the Kvanefjeld Project will prove to be hugely profitable.

The mining licence should be granted soon and things should really start coming together for GGG during 2021.


----------



## jbocker (1 March 2021)

Dona Ferentes said:


> Good run, 10c to 30c in four months.



Bad Run 34c to 15c in one month. The increase in public consultation time frame from the original 12 weeks to  June has been off putting and I suspect a little unrest in the public.  The extension is due to covid-19 precautions vs public consultation access, need more time to enable proper consultation / engagement.
Might watch how low GGG can go, and then think of dipping a toe back in. 
(my 2021 competition year pick is being messed up at this price)
Not holding.


----------



## Dona Ferentes (1 April 2021)

bit of a story in the AFR today, about how an Aust geologist, Greg Barnes, was the rock whisperer who, who with the US Geological Survey, briefed energy and defence chiefs about Greenland's mineral and especially rare earth wealth and was the trigger for Trump offering to buy it.









						How a Perth geologist convinced Trump to buy Greenland
					

Australia is playing an outsized role in Greenland’s rare earth boom, where escalating big power, Arctic competition and a snap election may decide the fate of two Perth-based companies.




					www.afr.com
				





_*Greenland Minerals *has found itself at the heart of a bruising political fight in Greenland over its plans to build a uranium and rare earth mine a short distance away from the Tanbreez site, on the same lump of rock known as the Ilimaussaq intrusive complex*.*_
_
The mine – and its growing environmental opposition – triggered the collapse of the ruling coalition in February, paving the way for a snap election on April 6 that is attracting international scrutiny.

While Greenland Minerals is a minnow in Perth, it’s a huge player in Greenland, where its Kvanefjeld project (Kuannersuit in the local Inuit language) promises to bring 700 jobs to a region where the nearest and biggest town is home to just 1300 residents and where the population has dwindled by a quarter since 1991.

The project’s construction costs will be equivalent to 40 per cent of Greenland’s gross domestic product, according to the company, and will ultimately produce an annual income of 1.2 billion Danish krone ($250 million), helping to set the foundation for full independence from Denmark, which continues to bankroll the island and its population.

But the project has its outspoken critics. They warn of environmental disaster and question its use of Chinese investors. Barnes even accuses the company of behaving like “the ugly Australian abroad” and interfering in the country’s election, making it harder for other foreign projects to win over local support.

As well as rebutting environmental concerns over his project, Mair argues that the involvement of Chengdu-based Shenghe Resources – which he says holds 9.4 per cent of Greenland Minerals – is an advantage because of the technical knowledge it brings._



> “There’s not a lot of Western experience in this particular space. They’ve provided a huge amount of horsepower to the technical side of the project and it’s not like they have a controlling stake, control of the agenda or the strategy.”





> “Shenghe is widely regarded as a leader in rare earth processing, and is an established supplier to international end-users.”




_Mair says the relationship is actually an example of technology transfer out of China: the processing of rare earths and other commodities “isn’t done in a black box on the other side of the earth; it’s done here in Australia in commercial, accredited laboratories”.

Furthermore, Mair says that while people are quick to point to the company’s Chinese partners, Greenland Minerals has a far larger investor base – more than 20 per cent – and a fast-growing European share register, and over 15 per cent held by North American investors. "Shenghe’s involvement in US rare earth producer MP Materials has been similar.”_


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 April 2021)

I am just returning to my bolthole in Knightsbridge and happened upon an early edition of the Times of London.

Buyers of GGG beware.




> "A Chinese-backed strategic mining project in Greenland faces cancellation after a party opposed to it won the territory’s parliamentary election."






> "The territory’s semi-autonomous government has been assiduously courted by China, which has been granted several licences for research and mining bases on the island. The Kvanefjeld site is owned by Greenland Minerals, an Australian mining exploration company whose largest shareholder is Shenghe Resources, a firm close to the Chinese government.






> The project is contentious for Greenlanders. A poll published on Monday by _Sermitsiaq_, a local newspaper, found that 63 per cent of the population were against it, in part because of concerns about the environmental hazards of uranium mining.




gg


----------



## Dona Ferentes (8 April 2021)

interesting spin (!)

(from Reuters) .. _The Kvanefjeld rare earth mining project in southern Greenland _*will be halted, *_the leader of the Inuit Ataqatigiit party that won Tuesday's snap election told state broadcaster DR on Wednesday_.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 April 2021)

GGG  in a "Trading Pause"

I never halted him, yer honour, I merely paused him.

Best beware of stocks with significant Chinese ownership atm.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 April 2021)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> GGG  in a "Trading Pause"
> 
> I never halted him, yer honour, I merely paused him.
> 
> ...



GGG is halted.


> RE: TRADING HALT REQUEST
> Greenland Minerals Limited (ASX:GGG) (“the Company”) requests an immediate trading halt of its securities and provides the following information in accordance with Listing Rule 17.1:
> 
> The trading halt is requested pending an update to the market regarding the results of the recent election in Greenland.
> ...




gg


----------



## jbocker (8 April 2021)

I bailed out about a week ago. I was looking for $ to invest elsewhere and I thought I had plenty of time to maybe get back in later (end May). Looks like a fortunate decision.
I am also very careful now of companies with significant Chinese ownership after my NKP experience.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 April 2021)

jbocker said:


> I bailed out about a week ago. I was looking for $ to invest elsewhere and I thought I had plenty of time to maybe get back in later (end May). Looks like a fortunate decision.
> I am also very careful now of companies with significant Chinese ownership after my NKP experience.



A fortunate move. 

Some will spin this as an indigenous/green issue, which may be partly true.

However the Orange Loon tried to purchase Greenland for its Rare Earth lodes when he was president, and of course failed. 

Geopolitical events are moving apace. The ole Central Committee of the CCP will have this as one of their agenda items this week. 

As will the cousins in the White House and on Capitol Hill, if the latter has not been occupied again by bogans.

And our Feds will probably be occupied with the latest Laming to poke its head out of the sleaze. 

gg


----------



## jbocker (8 April 2021)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> And our Feds will probably be occupied with the latest Laming to poke its head out of the sleaze.



Good political grounding is rare earth at the moment.


----------



## frugal.rock (8 April 2021)

It took a decent hit out of it before the safety brake was applied.
I wonder how much slippage will continue when released....
Perhaps a company name change is in order now?


----------



## jbocker (8 April 2021)

frugal.rock said:


> Perhaps a company name change is in order now?



Yep that is what I did, and change of country resource location. Bought a little bit of NTU with some rare earth in Australia.
I don't like the future of GGG - I don't think I will live long enough to see them get this out of the ground.
My 2021 tipping is shot with this too.


----------



## peter2 (9 April 2021)

I wonder if the bad news concerning GGG has increased demand for other rare earth projects?

I notice up bars in many other RE companies today.
ARR, ARU, ASM, HAS, IXR, NTU, PEK, SOR, VML.

_Edit: I notice that the ASF rare earth society are onto it. _


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 April 2021)

Well there you go. 

GGG has risen by 15% to 20% so far today. 

Is it a sophisticated pump and dump?

gg


----------



## frugal.rock (9 April 2021)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Is it a sophisticated pump and dump?



Probably.
Very low volume pushed it down yesterday.
I've been in & out of it for a dip today.


----------



## mullokintyre (18 July 2021)

Greenland has voted to suspend Oil and Uranium exploration (because of climate change).
see Nordic Ice News and UPI
That will not be good for GGG, given some of the push was for Uranium.
Maybe the CCP will  suddenly find an old map with dotted lines showing that Greenland was always part of China.
Mick


----------



## debtfree (15 September 2021)

A quick chart update on GGG, nice break out yesterday.


----------



## peter2 (11 November 2021)

Greenland Parliament has banned uranium mining which was going to be a by-product of the proposed Kvanefjeld rare earths mine. 

*GGG* in trading halt as it considers it's future.


----------



## barney (11 November 2021)

peter2 said:


> Greenland Parliament has banned uranium mining which was going to be a by-product of the proposed Kvanefjeld rare earths mine.
> 
> *GGG* in trading halt as it considers it's future.



Don't hold any GGG but have always thought their issues/location have made them a bit riskier than a few of the other R/E Specs.

I hope they can work out a plan of attack for anyone holding. Never like seeing any Spec Stock suffer given this is where I live


----------



## System (10 November 2022)

On November 10th, 2022, Greenland Minerals Limited (GGG) changed its name and ASX code to Energy Transition Minerals Limited (ETM).


----------



## Dona Ferentes (10 November 2022)

from the _*Quarterly*_: 

The primary objective of the Company remains the development of the Kvanefjeld rare earths project and, through the arbitration process that the litigation funder will now be supporting, the Company is seeking clarity on the application of Act No. 20 to the Kvanefjeld project, so that a path forward for the development of this important asset can be worked out by all parties.

As well, GGG entered into a binding heads of agreement with Technology Metals Europe SL and its sole shareholder Welsbach Holdings Pte Ltd, for the right to_ earn in _a 51% interest in TME, which is the sole owner of an exploration permit in Spain prospective for *lithium*, known as the Villasrubias project.


_trading just above 5c_


----------



## rcw1 (29 December 2022)

Good afternoon
52 week high today (29/12/22)
Not holding

Edit: the performance chart does not reflect this … 6 months does 
Kind regards
Rcw1


----------

