ShareProphets : tidm

PAF

Pan African Resources – full-year results, a winning share tip still Buy

Tip last month, gold producer from South Africa and Australia, Pan African Resources (PAF) has announced its year ended 30th June 2026 results including a headline “A Record Year in Operational and Financial Performance” and noting further “expected increase in production”. What about this in the context of the valuation from a 109.9p offer price tip to a current 120.9p share price?

By HotStockRockets | Published 2026-09-17 07:45:58 |

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – agreement to acquire Emmerson Resources Limited for 0.1493 new shares per share

2026-03-09 07:55:52

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – H1 “headline EPS” up to $0.0734, indicative DPS 0.54745p, argues positioned to continue production growth

2026-02-18 07:36:59

Pan African Resources (#PAF) H1 gold output up 51%, more gains expected in H2

2026-01-26 07:25:51

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – moves from AIM to London Stock Exchange Main Market

2025-10-24 06:58:29

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – “Intention to move from AIM to London Main Market”

2025-09-08 06:59:57

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – reduces current year guidance due to production and electricity supply challenges

2023-05-26 06:37:18

Pan African (PAF) suspends operations as South Africa goes into lockdown

2020-03-24 07:49:56

Pan African Resources – issues “well disseminated to the market”, so why the share price decline?

A “Trading Statement and Production Update” from Pan African Resources (PAF) sees CEO Cobus Loots emphasise “issues, as well as the definitive remedial actions we implemented, were well disseminated to the market” and “we are well on track to deliver into our 2019 targets and look forward to the year ahead”. The shares have though currently responded around 9% lower, below 8p…

By Steve Moore | Published 2018-09-14 15:10:24 |

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – agrees Barberton Mines three-year wage agreement

2018-09-07 06:37:11

Pump & Dump the Numis way - ref Pan African Resources

It is not just unrepentant former armed bank robbers who engaged in pump and dump. Even the "most respectable" City Nomads and brokers are, it seems, at it. Welcome to 24 hours in the world of Numis.

By Steve Moore & Tom Winnifrith | Published 2017-04-12 02:39:50 |

Pan African Resources (#PAF) – FY EPS +120%, DPS up to 0.82p, “well positioned to increase profitable production”

2016-09-20 23:25:08

SP Angel Morning Mining note: Randgold Resources & Pan African Resources

John Meyer of SP Angel this morning comments on RandGold Resources (RRS) and Pan African Resources (PAF) as well as offering a detailed macro view on the news that is shaping global mining and the AIM mining pond.

By ShareProphets | Published 2016-02-08 06:40:56 |

Zak Mir's Bear Call Of The Day: Pan African Resources: Risk Of 6p Destination for the shares

A deflationary environment, issues in China, and the wind down from a bubble in the sector at the start of this decade have all contributed to making it a miserable time for most companies in this space, and of course their shareholders.

By Zak Mir | Published 2015-07-12 06:49:58 |

Earnings plunge at Pan African, shares to follow?

South African gold and platinum producer Pan African Resources (PAF) says it will now work to improve volume and grades in key operations after a 68% fall in attributable first-half earnings to £5.5 million. The company, quoted on AIM and in Johannesburg, saw turnover in the six months to December slide 19.5% to £68.1 million, while all-in costs on the gold side rose from $965 (£622) to $1,165 an ounce, the average gold selling price fell from $1,311 to $1,231 an ounce and the South African Rand weakened.

By Robert Tyerman | Published 2015-02-27 01:06:45 |

Pan African Resources (#PAF) - ghastly H2 profits warning

2015-01-13 00:27:59

Pan African at 14.25p – Champagne Charlie at Edison slashes valuation from 29p to 24.25p

Paid for researcher Edison has today published a detailed ten page note on Pan African Resources (PAF). Penned by convicted felon The Honourable “he hits who he wants” Charlie Gibson the note is bullish in tone (‘natch, Pan pays for this research) but the target price is slashed from 29p to 24.25p.

By Staff Writer | Published 2014-03-11 13:37:34 |

Pan African at 13p worth 31.4p – Edison

Yesterday Pan African Resources (PAF) finally appointed a new CEO and FD. That ends one uncertainty and commissioned researcher Edison has published a report suggesting that the shares, at 13p, could be worth 31.4p.

By Staff Writer | Published 2013-09-11 05:11:06 |

Pan African Resources - Barberton tailings Onstream

AIM-listed, South Africa-focused precious metals producer Pan African Resources (PAF) has announced the successful commissioning of, and first gold pour from, a tailings retreatment project at its Barberton mines. Will this halt the share slide?

By Steve Moore | Published 2013-07-01 11:13:49 |

Pan African at 17p is worth 30.9p – Edison 

Gold mining stocks such as Pan African Resources (PAF) are not top of the pops but commissioned researcher Edison argues that for Pan, at least, the underlying value investment case is solid.

By Staff Writer | Published 2013-05-11 04:29:36 |

previous 0 Page 1 of 2 (22 articles) next 2

Latest News

Show All

Video: Rigged Markets, Why The Real Bubble Is In Government Bonds & Revaluing Gold

AB Dynamics – “performance for FY2026 is expected to be in line with the guidance”, not the initial guidance though!…

Cirata letter to FCA & AIM Regulation: was bad news suppressed ahead of fund raise? I bet it was!

Pan African Resources – full-year results, a winning share tip still Buy

TW does not understand the science and maths at Avacta so what do Evil Banksta and Jim Mellon say?

UPDATED: Lucian Miers & Jim Mellon are coming back to Sharestock in 2027: early bird tickets now on sale, event 15% sold out!

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: Joshua turns 10, congenital idiots turn on me and a victory lap as Cirata crashes, the FCA should be all over this

WH Smith – argues “solid peak trading”, but how ‘solid’ really?…

Avacta: it’s a spoof says Evil Banksta add to shorts into the share price spike

Facilities by ADF – interims emphasise its “strength”, so a trading warning (natch!)…

Recent Comments

MASARAP17 Sep 2026

Tom, thanks again for getting Harry’s response.Lastly, would you mind putting a few specific factual questions to for him to answer rather than providing a general explanation, as these are really the points that remain unresolved:1)Were any Lycopodium employees actually based and working at Tulu Kapi after 4 August, as opposed to visiting or inspecting? 2)Which Lycopodium subcontractors were physically working at Tulu Kapi during August?3)Was BCM physically carrying out bulk earthworks or drilling at Tulu Kapi during August and immediately before 4 September?4)Did any KEFI/TKGM personnel, contractors or subcontractors reduce, suspend or cease their physical presence at Tulu Kapi before 4 September?5)If so, when did that happen and why?6)Were any personnel advised to leave or not attend Tulu Kapi because of security concerns before 4 September?7)If the answer to any of the above is yes, when was KEFI management first aware? 8)Lycopodium has said that, based on its scope, it would likely not have been onsite until sometime in 2027 and that any eventual site presence remained subject to its premobilisation requirements. If that was the position, why did KEFI state on 4 August that Lycopodium was already “installing” personnel and subcontractors at Tulu Kapi and “intensively mobilising” personnel, subcontractors and systems on the ground? 9)Given KEFI repeatedly stated that the project remained on schedule for commissioning in late 2027 and full production in 2028, what was the factual basis for maintaining that timetable if Lycopodium’s own physical mobilisation was not expected until sometime in 2027 and was still subject to premobilisation requirements?Those answers would resolve most of the uncertainty far more effectively than a general description of project sequencing. If Harry is willing to respond, it would be particularly helpful if he could answer each question individually, using the same numbered order, so that each point is addressed clearly and there is no ambiguity about which issue each answer relates to.

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: a long chat with Harry Adams

MASARAP17 Sep 2026

Tom, as someone who makes his living from words, I’d be interested to know whether you genuinely think an ordinary reader would take ‘intensively mobilising personnel… on the ground’ to mean mainly systems work, subcontractor oversight and occasional visits. Harry’s explanation still doesn’t answer the selected wording KEFI chose on 4 August.If Lycopodium’s role then was mainly systems work, subcontractor oversight and occasional site visits ahead of its own physical mobilisation sometime in 2027, why say Lycopodium was “installing their own personnel… at Tulu Kapi” and “intensively mobilising personnel… on the ground”?And the same applies to BCM: was it actually carrying out bulk earthworks/drilling at Tulu Kapi during August and immediately before 4 September?

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: a long chat with Harry Adams

MASARAP17 Sep 2026

Thanks Tom. That is useful clarification from Harry, but I’m not sure it fully resolves the wording of the 4 August RNS.Sam Wells, on behalf of Lycopodium, has told me that based on Lycopodium’s scope its natural progression was that it would likely not have been onsite until sometime in 2027, subject to premobilisation requirements.Harry now appears to be saying that the August reference to Lycopodium installing personnel and subcontractors “at Tulu Kapi” and “intensively mobilising … on the ground” principally referred to local subcontractors being appointed/overseen by Lycopodium, together with Lycopodium visiting and inspecting the site.That is useful information, but it is not quite the impression I think most investors would naturally have taken from the wording “installing their own personnel … at Tulu Kapi”.It would therefore still be helpful for KEFI simply to clarify:1. Were any Lycopodium employees actually based and working at Tulu Kapi following 4 August, as opposed to making occasional visits?2. Which Lycopodium subcontractors were physically working at Tulu Kapi during August?3. Was BCM physically carrying out bulk earthworks/drilling at Tulu Kapi throughout August and immediately before 4 September?4. Did any of that physical contractor activity reduce or cease before 4 September and, if so, when and why?Those are straightforward factual questions and would resolve the issue.

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: a long chat with Harry Adams

TOM17 Sep 2026

Harry Adams says:Lyco is obviously installing its systems and people over and through the local subcontractors who it appoints and oversees. That process has been underway for months. In doing so, it visits and inspects tulu kapi and the sub-contractors’ other sites. Moving these people and machines onto tulu kapi follows resettlement as has always been made clear.And security infrastructure and associated systems also get installed before a large construction group.Likewise, whilst we have ordered components of the plant, they need to be manufactured and delivered in order to instal.These explanations can be deemed common sense by me or material information by an individual reader. I leave that to you to judge and I am comfortable with our level of transparency.EndsI agree with Harry

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: a long chat with Harry Adams

MASARAP17 Sep 2026

Leaving aside the tragic events themselves, there are some important factual questions about the period between KEFI’s 4 August RNS and the 4 September attack which remain unanswered.These arise in part from Lycopodium’s clarification that, based on its scope, it would likely not have been on site until sometime in 2027 and that any eventual site presence remained subject to the Company’s premobilisation requirements.That sits very awkwardly with KEFI’s 4 August RNS, which stated that Lycopodium, EEP, ERA and BCM were:“installing their own personnel, subcontractors and systems at Tulu Kapi”and were:“intensively mobilising personnel, subcontractors and systems on the ground.”I have now asked three times by email for the following questions to be addressed through the Company’s Q&A section, without even receiving an acknowledgement:Which KEFI/TKGM employees, principal contractors and subcontractors were actually physically active at Tulu Kapi following the 4 August announcement?Did any contractor or subcontractor reduce, suspend or cease its on-site presence before 4 September? If so, when and why?Were any KEFI/TKGM employees withdrawn, relocated, stood down, advised not to attend site or otherwise subject to changed working or travel arrangements before 4 September?Did KEFI, TKGM, its security advisers or contractors receive any project-specific warnings, threat assessments or security advice before 4 September which affected staffing, access or project activity?If personnel had already left Tulu Kapi before the attack, when did that happen and what prompted it?If there was any material change from the position described on 4 August, when KEFI said principal contractors were “intensively mobilising personnel, subcontractors and systems on the ground”, why was the market not updated?Alternatively, if there was no meaningful physical contractor presence at Tulu Kapi in the manner naturally conveyed by the 4 August RNS, how does KEFI reconcile that with the wording of the announcement?Was the physical contractor mobilisation described on 4 August part of the basis for KEFI’s repeated statement that the project remained on schedule for commissioning in late 2027 and full production in 2028?These are not questions about sensitive operational security. They are questions about the accuracy of information already provided to shareholders and the chronology immediately before a material event.I have put these questions directly to KEFI and would like to see a clear response through the Company’s Q&A section.

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast: a long chat with Harry Adams

MASARAP17 Sep 2026

First things first, the sad loss of life and any injuries should be the main focus. There is nothing like seeing photographs of some of the victims, as Tom has, to bring home the personal tragedies involved. It was an act of evil and will hopefully lead to a much stronger security ring around the site going forward.Turning to the less important, but still legitimate, shareholder issues, I have received a direct response from Sam Wells on behalf of Lycopodium regarding its physical presence at Tulu Kapi.He stated: “From the Company’s perspective, the natural order of progression (based on their scope) is to likely not have been onsite at this project until sometime in 2027, and always subject to all of the Company’s premobilisation requirements.”That sits very awkwardly with KEFI’s 4 August RNS, which stated that Lycopodium, EEP, ERA and BCM were: “installing their own personnel, subcontractors and systems at Tulu Kapi” and were: “intensively mobilising personnel, subcontractors and systems on the ground.”On any ordinary reading, KEFI’s wording conveyed that Lycopodium was part of the physical mobilisation taking place at Tulu Kapi at that time. Lycopodium now says its natural progression was that it would likely not even be on site until sometime in 2027. That is a serious discrepancy between KEFI’s 4 August RNS and Lycopodium’s account which Kefi should explain. I have asked KEFI several times to provide answers on their Q&A to explain the discrepancy.The obvious questions are: what precisely was KEFI referring to in relation to Lycopodium on 4 August, which principal contractors were actually physically active at Tulu Kapi, and did any of that activity reduce or cease before 4 September? There may be a straightforward explanation, but shareholders are entitled to one.

Tom Winnifrith Bearcast No 2: Kefi

SD198317 Sep 2026

:)Nice one Tom but still, you are quoting generic statistics and probability of success. Avacta is using warheads that are already proven. Hence one of the reasons the FDA granted them a pivotal phase 2 trial for generation 1 drug. When you have warheads already proven, that derisks phase 3 massively. Do you not understand that? Because that alone is just one of many things you are missing about avacta and its probability of success and therefore its risk asjusted net present value. Effectively warhead proven before they even start the trial, increasing probability of success way beyond that of a generic POS. Now they've proven safety multiple times in multiple patients with 2 highly toxic warheads.Anyway, I can only conclude you either dont understand or dont want to understand? My offer is genuine to help educate you but if youre not interested, fine. Good luck with your African gold mines and modular housing in South America which are far less risky than a heavily scrutinised and regulated British biotech 👍

TW does not understand the science and maths at Avacta so what do Evil Banksta and Jim Mellon say?

TOM17 Sep 2026

That is an admission I would not make on BBs if I were you. Another piece on way!

Avacta: it’s a spoof says Evil Banksta add to shorts into the share price spike

PIEROTLUNAIRE16 Sep 2026

I personally think that the CoS in a repurposed targeted version of an approved efficacious existing product is higher than a de novo candidate.But the issue here is that there needs fairly soon to be a £25m raise. The key issue is whether there is any industry ratification of the precision platform at this point. If there is, in the form of a deal with an upfront, then tick, a smaller capital raise can be done.If no industry ratification with cash attached, then yet another plain vanilla raise will be a very bloody affair.Comes down to industry ratification at this point (or not). It’s the swing factor.

Avacta: it’s a spoof says Evil Banksta add to shorts into the share price spike