https://www.brileysecurities.com/blog/more-than-just-mining-de-risking-the-critical-mineral-supply-chain

Rare earths and critical minerals continue to dominate geopolitical headlines, but the market conversation is rapidly shifting from where these minerals are in the ground to how they actually reach commercial viability. Moving a project from an exploration-stage discovery to a producing asset requires clearing metallurgical, capital, and geopolitical hurdles.

During B. Riley Securities' 26th Annual Institutional Investor Conference, industry leaders gathered for our Rare Earths & Critical Minerals: State of the Union. Moderated by Nick Giles (Senior Equity Research Analyst at B. Riley Securities), the discussion featured Mark A. Smith (Executive Chairman, President & CEO at NioCorp) and Trevor Anderson (Head of Business Development at Brazilian Rare Earths). The panel outlined what it truly takes to build a viable alternative to the dominant Chinese supply chain.

https://preview.redd.it/dw95jzh4bmah1.png?width=1075&format=png&auto=webp&s=1f5cc3d2eb0ba659e698775adbf191f227a06e4b

Key Takeaways:

The supply chain imperative
Building a meaningful alternative to Chinese supply requires a complete domestic supply chain from extraction all the way through to magnet production. The panel was clear: without that full infrastructure in place, reducing dependence on China in any tangible way remains out of reach.

What separates viable projects from the rest
The panel emphasized that rigorous asset evaluation is critical. NioCorp's Elk Creek Critical Minerals Project in Nebraska is the only development-stage U.S. project containing niobium, scandium, titanium, and rare earth elements. Brazilian Rare Earths' Monte Alto project is advancing toward a scoping study release, with a French engineering consultancy engaged to assist in designing and developing its separation facility in Brazil.

The role of government
Government support is playing a significant role in improving project viability and attracting institutional capital. The panel highlighted the Department of Defense's $110/kg floor price for neodymium-praseodymium oxide, established through the MP Materials agreement, as a meaningful signal of government commitment to domestic supply chain development. Additionally, loan authorizations and USDFC project finance involvement are helping development-stage projects advance.

Looking ahead
The panel's near-term outlook was constructive. U.S. rare earth magnet production is steadily advancing, with domestic facilities now coming online in 2026. Key financing authorizations and scoping study milestones are expected across several development-stage projects.

https://octanecdn.com/brileyfincom/2026_annual_investor_conference_handbook_6.pdf

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7477755151806590976/

July 1st, 2026~Critical Minerals: The New Frontline in US-China Economic Competition (report)

Critical-Minerals-July-2026-English.pdf

https://preview.redd.it/6wzrqvlndoah1.png?width=1431&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc6d7d06165f2b5d88a63729b3529b663aec9081

July 1st, 2026~Recent China Export Control Actions Signal Active Enforcement for Rare Earths and Strategic Minerals

A series of recent developments—including the reported detention of foreign nationals in China, domestic enforcement actions against Chinese exporters, and MOFCOM Announcement No. 26 of 2026 formalizing a public reporting mechanism for strategic mineral export control violations—signal an increasingly active enforcement posture in this area. This LawFlash examines these developments and their practical implications for multinational companies.

Recent China Export Control Actions Signal Active Enforcement for Rare Earths and Strategic Minerals

FOREIGN NATIONALS DETAINED FOR SMUGGLING

Earlier this week, the Japanese government confirmed that two Japanese nationals employed by a major Japanese company were detained in Dalian in May 2026 on allegations of smuggling goods subject to export restrictions, reportedly involving rare-earth-related items. Based on public reports, this represents one of the first known instances of foreign nationals being detained in China in connection with an alleged export control violation involving such items.

Although the full facts of the case have not been publicly disclosed, the development is notable from a compliance perspective. China’s export controls in this area are grounded in national security and nonproliferation considerations, as certain rare-earth-related items, technologies, and end uses may be subject to China’s dual-use export control regime depending on the applicable control list, technical parameters, item form, and end-use/end-user factors. Some high-profile prior detentions of foreign nationals in China have involved national security–related allegations, but the reported use of customs smuggling and export control theories in a rare-earth-related matter may indicate a more active and visible enforcement posture in the strategic minerals area.

Companies operating in sectors that may involve controlled strategic minerals and dual-use items should carefully evaluate their compliance frameworks and ensure their personnel understand the current regulatory environment.

DOMESTIC ENFORCEMENT PRESSURE ON CHINESE EXPORTERS

Enforcement pressure is not limited to foreign nationals. On June 18, 2026, a major Chinese precision optics company (market capitalization approximately 11.7 billion renminbi) disclosed that its chairman had been placed under compulsory measures by the Shanghai Customs anti-smuggling bureau. The alleged violation involved falsely declaring the material composition of exported lenses containing germanium as ordinary optical glass to circumvent export licensing requirements.

China initially controlled germanium-related items under the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) and General Administration of Customs Announcement No. 23 of 2023. They have since been incorporated into China’s unified Dual-Use Items Export Control List published under MOFCOM Announcement No. 51 of 2024, effective December 1, 2024. Customs reportedly reviewed approximately three years of export records in reaching its determination.

This domestic enforcement action carries important implications for foreign buyers and supply chain participants. As Chinese exporters face heightened scrutiny and personal criminal liability risk for misclassification or false declarations, they are likely to adopt more conservative compliance postures.

Foreign companies should anticipate that Chinese suppliers may impose more rigorous end-use and end-user certification requirements, request additional documentation, or decline transactions where the compliance risk is perceived as elevated. Also, foreign buyers should ensure they are not placing pressure on Chinese suppliers to misclassify items, omit relevant end use or end user information, reroute shipments through third countries, disassemble controlled items into components, or otherwise circumvent export control requirements.

MOFCOM ANNOUNCEMENT: PUBLIC REPORTING MECHANISM FOR STRATEGIC MINERAL EXPORT CONTROL VIOLATIONS

On June 24, 2026, MOFCOM published Announcement No. 26 of 2026, which formalizes the reporting and handling of violations involving strategic mineral dual-use export controls. Effective July 1, 2026, the announcement establishes a mechanism encouraging organizations and individuals to report suspected violations. The scope of reportable conduct is broad, including, among other things:

• Exporting controlled items without a permit or exceeding license scope
• Disguising controlled items through modification or disassembly into components
• Routing exports through third countries to circumvent controls
• Transferring controlled technologies through trade, investment, exhibitions, joint research and development, consulting, or similar channels
• Providing logistics, customs brokerage, ecommerce, or financial services in support of unlawful exports
• Assisting importers or end users in evading controls
• Transacting with restricted importers or end users
• Failing to seek authorization for non-listed strategic-mineral-related goods, technologies, or services where the exporter knows or should know that Article 12 export-control risks may exist
• Accepting or committing to accept foreign government requests for access, on-site verification, or similar activities related to strategic mineral dual-use export controls without authorization

Voluntary self-reporting is identified as a potential mitigating factor, while malicious false reporting may be penalized. The practical effect of this mechanism is to significantly increase the likelihood of detection through employees, competitors, and other market participants—expanding enforcement beyond the capacity of government inspectors alone.

THE BROADER REGULATORY CONTEXT

These enforcement developments are not confined to any single bilateral relationship. China’s tightening of export controls on rare earths and strategic minerals has affected companies across multiple jurisdictions. Some restrictions apply broadly, requiring export authorization for any destination. Others more recently focused on tightening controls to specific countries and entities.

With respect to Japan, China tightened controls on dual-use exports involving certain Japanese entities and military end uses beginning in January 2026, with reported practical effects on rare-earth-related supply chains. With respect to the United States, which traditionally relies heavily on rare earth materials originating in China, in June 2026 China added 10 US entities to its export control list, including rare earth miners MP Materials and USA Rare Earth. The restrictions also prohibit parties located anywhere from transferring or providing dual-use items originating in China to these entities.

This action followed the US Department of Defense’s update to its Section 1260H list, which prohibits the Department from entering into, renewing, or extending contracts for goods, services, or technology with a 1260H-listed entity or any entity it controls. On June 30, 2027, the prohibition expands to the procurement of goods or services produced or developed by such entities. The response by China’s Ministry of Finance also restricted government procurement of products manufactured by 46 listed US companies, many of which are US defense contractors, but also excluded US-invested enterprises operating in China.

These developments indicate that China applies its export control enforcement over strategic minerals broadly. The extraterritorial reach of its jurisdiction to anyone dealing in China-origin rare earth material means the compliance exposure is not limited to targeted companies. Businesses in any jurisdiction that source, process, or trade in rare earths and strategic minerals should assess their compliance posture accordingly and evaluate supply chain exposure.

PRACTICAL STEPS FOR MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES

These developments require a more deliberate and informed approach to compliance. Companies should consider the following:

Evaluate the Risk Environment

Companies with personnel in China involved in procurement, logistics, or export compliance for strategic minerals and dual-use items should conduct a thorough assessment of their exposure under the current regulatory framework. This includes understanding which items in their supply chain may be subject to Chinese export controls and ensuring that classification determinations are defensible and exports comply with any licensing restrictions.

Strengthen Internal Compliance Frameworks

The new public reporting mechanism means that compliance failures are more likely to be detected. Companies should review internal procedures for handling export-controlled items, ensure that personnel understand the scope of China’s export controls, and establish clear escalation protocols for ambiguous situations. For companies that also may be subject to US jurisdiction, reviewing and updating their compliance programs to address both Chinese and US requirements is increasingly necessary to avoid legal conflicts.

Exercise Caution with Foreign Government Verification Requests

Announcement No. 26 explicitly identifies unauthorized acceptance of foreign government requests for access, on-site verification, or similar activities related to strategic mineral export controls as reportable conduct. Companies should carefully review any foreign-government request, or any customer or prime-contractor request that appears to implement, relay, or satisfy a foreign-government access, on-site verification, audit, or end-use check requirement involving strategic minerals. Where such requests arise, companies should pause and conduct legal review to identify a path that is consistent with both Chinese law and any applicable foreign legal obligations, rather than accepting or declining without analysis.

Prepare for Contingencies

Companies should ensure they have allocated sufficient resources to compliance teams to address these new risks and have crisis management plans in place, such as legal counsel identified in advance, communication protocols, and consular notification procedures.

Monitor Supplier Behavior and Maintain Compliance Discipline

As Chinese exporters face increased enforcement pressure, foreign buyers may encounter supply disruptions, requests for additional certifications, or refusals to transact. In particular, companies are receiving significantly more detailed end use and end user due diligence requests from Chinese exporters regarding a company’s business operations, market, customers, intended use for products and other information that companies may consider confidential or proprietary.

Companies should proactively engage with their Chinese suppliers to understand how this evolving regulatory environment may affect their commercial relationships. Companies should also ensure that their own procurement practices do not encourage or facilitate noncompliance by Chinese counterparties—including through pressure to misclassify items, omit information that may be relevant to a product’s end use or end user, reroute through third countries, or minimize export control obligations.

LOOKING AHEAD

Companies should monitor MOFCOM announcements, customs enforcement actions, and related regulatory developments that may signal further changes. Similarly, given the back-and-forth escalations between the United States and China, it is important to pay attention to any potential new export or business restrictions imposed by the US government.

The reported detention of foreign nationals in connection with alleged rare-earth-related export control violations, combined with the new MOFCOM public reporting mechanism taking effect July 1, indicates that the enforcement framework around strategic minerals is becoming more active, visible, and practically relevant for companies.

Companies that proactively assess their exposure, strengthen their compliance frameworks, and prepare for contingencies will be best positioned to navigate this environment effectively.

FORM YOUR OWN OPINIONS & CONCLUSIONS:

Yesterday in Niocorp, this action occurred in the near term options expirations:

July 2nd 2026

Strike

$4- Volume of 203 on OI of 1; today's resulting OI = 202
$4.5- Volume of 1878 on OI of 35; today's resulting OI = 1896
$5- Volume of 506 on OI of 88; today's resulting OI = 558

July 17th 2026

Strike

$5- Volume of 13,113 on OI of 383; today's resulting OI = 12,959. wow.

This is an enormous amount of option premium that was either used to buy to open or sell to open. It's roughly $394,000 in option premium based on yesterday's prices. This is highly concentrated, so I would expect it's a couple parties with very bullish, speculative positioning OR one massive piece of a covered call strategy. You'd have to own a ton of shares to be selling that many contracts. I find it hard to believe this is not a speculative, bullish buy to open. We've seen them before, notably in May, but this is the largest we've seen by a mile. Also, I think it's worth noting that those short term speculative buys came during an expected catalyst period- and that positioning should've been expected. Given the timing of these and the short term duration, they are quite a bit more peculiar. Maybe just a player trying to make a quick buck on an obviously undervalued stock, or maybe somebody knows something.

Anyways, just thought this was interesting enough to share. If we can move through $5, those options could be a hell of a lot of fuel. Not financial advice. Do your own due diligence.

NioCorp Q3 2026: Catalysts, the Feasibility Study, the Traxys Offtake Agreement, Management Praise and Criticism, and Answers to Common Questions, Part 2

Disclaimer: This is not financial advice. Do your own research and verify all information independently. A cautious bull wrote this analysis, so there may be bias. This is a calendar Q3 2026 outlook, not a reference to NioCorp’s fiscal quarter. Any questions I attempted to answer should be double-checked by the reader to confirm the accuracy of the text.

Link to part 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/NIOCORP_MINE/comments/1uiar6h/niocorp_q3_2026_catalysts_the_feasibility_study/

13. Bonus: What to Watch in NioCorp’s Javelin Lobbying Filings

Links to the original filings:

LD-1: https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/ca1b153d-9878-4d1f-b7fa-5f19d9d33eb6/print/

LD-2(s):

Q4, 2025: https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/0c51bb10-ce6f-4cf4-b458-3592b1b51c28/print/

Q1, 2026: https://lda.senate.gov/filings/public/filing/471e24f9-5a7a-436c-a66e-9e77ab15753a/print/

One underfollowed source of information is NioCorp’s federal lobbying relationship with Javelin Advisors LLC.

This relationship is more important than general critical-minerals lobbying because Javelin’s disclosed assignment is unusually specific:

“Lobbying activities concerning funding and/or contracts with respect to NioCorp.”

That language appeared in Javelin’s original LD-1 registration and remained the stated purpose in the subsequent LD-2 reports.

This does not prove that federal funding or a government contract is imminent.

It does show that NioCorp hired Javelin specifically to pursue government funding and contractual opportunities rather than merely promote broad critical-minerals legislation.

The Original Javelin Registration

Javelin registered to represent NioCorp effective December 1, 2025.

The original LD-1 filing identified the general lobbying issue areas as:

• National security
• Government issues

The specific stated purpose was:

“Lobbying activities concerning funding and/or contracts with respect to NioCorp.”

The filing identified three lobbyists:

• George Sorial
• Keith Schiller
• Robert Seiden

The filing also disclosed that Keith Schiller previously served as Deputy Assistant to President Donald Trump and Director of Oval Office Operations from approximately January 20, 2017, through September 20, 2017.

That background is relevant because NioCorp is attempting to position Elk Creek as a national-security and industrial-policy project rather than merely another speculative mining development.

The registration also stated that no affiliated organization contributed more than $5,000 toward the lobbying activity and that no foreign entity had the type of ownership, control, or direct lobbying interest requiring disclosure on the form.

Fourth Quarter 2025 Lobbying Report

Javelin’s fourth-quarter 2025 LD-2 report disclosed:

• Client: NioCorp Developments
• Lobbying income: approximately $400,000
• Issue area: Government
• Specific purpose: funding and/or contracts concerning NioCorp
• Federal agency contacted: Department of Defense
• Lobbyists: George Sorial, Keith Schiller, and Robert Seiden

The reported $400,000 is substantial.

For a development-stage mining company, that level of reported lobbying income suggests that NioCorp viewed the federal funding and contracting effort as important enough to commit meaningful resources.

It also makes the Javelin relationship more than a minor Washington public-relations exercise.

However, the filing does not disclose:

• Which Department of Defense office was contacted
• Which funding program was discussed
• Whether the discussions involved grants, procurement, investment, or another structure
• How many meetings occurred
• Whether the government responded positively
• Whether any application advanced
• Whether a funding decision was made

The filing proves that the Department of Defense was lobbied concerning funding or contracts for NioCorp.

It does not prove that any funding or contract was approved.

First Quarter 2026 Lobbying Report

The first-quarter 2026 LD-2 report disclosed:

• Lobbying income: less than $5,000
• Issue area: Government
• Specific purpose: funding and/or contracts concerning NioCorp
• Federal entities contacted:
  • Department of Defense
  • White House Office
• Lobbyists:
  • Keith Schiller
  • George Sorial
  • Robert Seiden

The most important change is not the reported income.

It is the addition of the White House Office.

In the fourth quarter of 2025, the filing identified only the Department of Defense.

In the first quarter of 2026, it identified both the Department of Defense and the White House Office.

That suggests the lobbying effort expanded beyond the Department of Defense and reached the Executive Office of the President.

This aligns with NioCorp’s broader effort to present Elk Creek as a strategic national-security project involving:

• Domestic critical-minerals production
• Defense supply chains
• Rare earth independence
• Scandium and niobium availability
• Aerospace materials
• Industrial-base resilience
• Reduced dependence on China

The White House reference is meaningful, but it must not be overstated.

The filing does not identify:

• Which White House personnel were contacted
• Whether the contact was a formal meeting
• Whether NioCorp executives participated
• Which funding mechanism was discussed
• Whether the White House supported the request
• Whether the matter was referred to another agency
• Whether the contact produced any result

It proves lobbying contact involving the White House Office.

It does not prove White House endorsement or an impending funding announcement.

Why Did Reported Income Fall From $400,000 to Less Than $5,000?

The reported decline from approximately $400,000 in Q4 2025 to less than $5,000 in Q1 2026 is striking.

Possible explanations include:

• The original payment was front-loaded
• The $400,000 covered a larger engagement period
• Most compensation was paid when the relationship began
• Javelin performed limited billable work during Q1
• Work continued under a structure that generated little reportable quarterly income
• The engagement’s intensity declined
• The parties modified their commercial arrangement
• Timing or accounting treatment shifted income between reporting periods

The public filings do not tell us which explanation is correct.

Therefore, investors should not automatically conclude either:

• The Q1 filing means the lobbying effort failed
• The low reported income means the engagement ended
• The $400,000 means funding is likely
• White House contact means an announcement is close

The relationship remained active, the same three lobbyists remained listed, the specific issue remained funding and contracts, and the disclosed government contacts expanded to include the White House Office.

Those facts are more informative than the income number alone.

What Investors Should Watch in Future Javelin Filings

Future LD-2 reports may provide indirect clues about whether the government-funding effort is continuing, expanding, or losing momentum.

The most important items to watch are:

Agencies Contacted

Continued references to the Department of Defense and White House Office would suggest that those channels remain active.

The addition of other agencies could be significant, including:

• Department of Energy
• Department of Commerce
• Export-Import Bank
• Department of the Treasury
• Office of Management and Budget
• National Security Council
• Defense Production Act offices
• Department of the Interior

The significance would depend on the agency and the type of support NioCorp is pursuing.

Changes in the Stated Lobbying Purpose

The current language remains broad:

Funding and/or contracts with respect to NioCorp.

More specific language could be informative.

For example, future filings might reference:

• Defense Production Act funding
• Grants
• Loans
• Procurement
• Strategic investment
• Stockpile purchases
• Industrial-base expansion
• Critical-minerals production
• Specific appropriations
• Particular federal programs

More specific language would provide a better indication of what NioCorp is pursuing.

Reported Lobbying Income

A renewed increase in reported lobbying income could suggest:

• A new phase of work
• Expanded agency engagement
• A larger funding campaign
• Increased activity surrounding a particular application or contract

A continued low figure would not automatically be negative, but it would raise questions about the scale of the ongoing effort.

Lobbyist Changes

Investors should monitor whether:

• Keith Schiller remains listed
• George Sorial remains listed
• Robert Seiden remains listed
• New lobbyists are added
• Any lobbyists are removed

The addition of specialists with defense, appropriations, energy, trade, or White House experience could indicate a shift in strategy.

Termination Reports

A termination report would matter.

It could mean:

• The engagement ended without a visible result
• The assignment was completed
• NioCorp changed lobbying firms
• The company brought government relations in-house
• A funding effort advanced beyond the stage requiring Javelin
• NioCorp reduced lobbying expenditures

The reason would need to be evaluated using other public disclosures.

What Would Count as Real Progress?

The filings themselves measure lobbying activity, not success.

The strongest evidence of progress would be:

• A government grant
• A Department of Defense award
• A procurement agreement
• A strategic investment
• A Defense Production Act announcement
• A stockpile agreement
• A loan commitment
• A filed government contract
• A disclosed federal funding term sheet
• A formal agency announcement involving Elk Creek

Before one of those occurs, the Javelin filings should be treated as a secondary indicator.

They show that NioCorp is actively pursuing funding and contracts.

They do not show whether the government has agreed.

My Interpretation

The original registration and the two LD-2 reports show a deliberate federal funding campaign.

The sequence is notable:

1. Javelin registered in December 2025 specifically to pursue funding and contracts for NioCorp.
2. Approximately $400,000 in lobbying income was reported for Q4 2025.
3. The Department of Defense was identified as the federal agency contacted.
4. In Q1 2026, the White House Office was added alongside the Department of Defense.
5. The same three lobbyists remained involved.
6. The assignment continued to be described specifically as funding and contractual work for NioCorp.

That is worth monitoring.

It suggests NioCorp is not limiting its federal strategy to EXIM.

The company also appears to be pursuing some combination of defense funding, government contracts, or other executive-branch support.

However, investors should maintain discipline.

Lobbying is evidence of an attempt.

It is not evidence of an award.

The next Javelin filings may help show whether the campaign is expanding, continuing at a low level, or winding down. The decisive evidence will still be a formal government announcement or a filed agreement.

 

14. Final Take

NioCorp remains a high-upside, high-dependency development-stage company.

The project deserves praise for:

• Its unusual product diversity
• Its strategic location
• Its alignment with the U.S. critical-minerals policy
• Management’s ability to raise capital
• Management’s general professionalism
• Its potential relevance to defense, aerospace, and advanced manufacturing

Management deserves criticism for:

• Repeatedly missing self-imposed timelines
• Failing to finalize the Traxys agreement within the stated timeframe
• Repeated delays involving the feasibility study
• Providing an insufficient explanation for those delays

The technical picture has weakened.

Price is below both yearly volume-profile value areas, below several important moving averages, and below the Golden Ratio at $5.59.

However, the stock remains near its weekly 200 SMA and daily 1000 SMA, while the weekly 50 SMA remains above both the weekly 200 and weekly 500 SMAs.

The long-term structure is damaged but not broken.

The market’s message is simple:

Show us the feasibility study. Finalize the Traxys agreement. Prove the project is financeable.

Walrus

Sources that haven't been linked with the text:

https://niocorp.com/wp-content/uploads/NioCorp_Presentation.pdf
https://niocorp.com/

Sources used to answer question 2 in section 10:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949726000784/n2574_x310-def14a.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949724001980/n2574_x219ex19-1.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949725002940/n2574_x298-10q.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949726000784/n2574_x310-def14a.htm
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949726000785/n2574_x309-ars.pdf

NioCorp Q3 2026: Catalysts, the Feasibility Study, the Traxys Offtake Agreement, Management Praise and Criticism, and Answers to Common Questions, Part 1

Disclaimer: This is not financial advice. Do your own research and verify all information independently. A cautious bull wrote this analysis, so there may be bias. This is a calendar Q3 2026 outlook, not a reference to NioCorp’s fiscal quarter. Any questions I attempted to answer should be double-checked by the reader to confirm the accuracy of the text.

0. Current Snapshot

As of June 26, 2026, after-hours close:

• Share price: approximately $4.60
• Market capitalization: approximately $660.97 million
• Share count: broadly unchanged from the Q2 analysis
• Company stage: pre-revenue and development-stage
• Primary unresolved catalysts: the updated feasibility study, a binding Traxys offtake agreement, and further progress toward EXIM financing

NioCorp’s valuation remains dependent on future execution rather than present cash flow.

The basic situation entering Q3 is straightforward:

NioCorp has a potentially valuable and strategically important project, but two major deliverables remain unfinished:

1. The updated feasibility study
2. A finalized binding offtake arrangement with Traxys

Until those items are completed, the market has limited information with which to value the project properly or assess the probability of financing.

1. NioCorp Overview

NioCorp is developing the Elk Creek Critical Minerals Project in Nebraska.

The planned product suite potentially includes:

• Niobium
• Scandium
• Titanium
• Neodymium
• Praseodymium
• Dysprosium
• Terbium

That is potentially seven mineral products if neodymium and praseodymium are counted separately.

If neodymium and praseodymium are sold together as a combined NdPr product, the project would have approximately six commercial products:

• Ferroniobium
• Scandium product
• Titanium product
• NdPr product
• Dysprosium product
• Terbium product

Either way, that is an unusually diversified product suite for a development-stage mining company.

Most junior miners depend on one primary commodity. Some have two or three. NioCorp potentially has six or seven products, including rare earths whose non-Chinese prices have risen significantly amid Chinese export restrictions, as well as other critical minerals that the United States and its allies need.

The project’s quality is a major part of the bull case.

The difficulty is converting that geological and strategic potential into financeable project economics.

2. What Changed Since the Q2 Outlook?

The Q2 outlook focused heavily on the expectation that the updated feasibility study and an EXIM term sheet could arrive during the quarter.

That did not happen within the timelines previously discussed.

The stock has consequently fallen from approximately $4.90 on April 8 to approximately $4.60 after hours on June 26, with considerable volatility between those dates.

The company has continued communicating with investors, government officials, financial institutions, and potential commercial partners, but the two documents most critical to the near-term investment thesis remain outstanding:

• The updated feasibility study
• The binding Traxys offtake agreement

The market appears increasingly unwilling to assign a materially higher valuation without them.

3. The Major Q3 Catalysts

The Updated Feasibility Study

The updated feasibility study remains the most important catalyst.

It should provide updated information concerning:

• Capital expenditures
• Operating costs
• Mine plan
• Production schedule
• Recovery assumptions
• Reserve conversion
• Revenue mix
• Rare earth economics
• Project net present value
• Internal rate of return
• Financing requirements

The previous project economics are no longer sufficient for a final investment decision.

Inflation, engineering changes, updated metallurgy, rare earth inclusion, and revised financing assumptions can all materially alter the project.

The feasibility study does not automatically have to be spectacular for the stock to respond positively. It needs to demonstrate that Elk Creek remains economically attractive, technically credible, and financeable.

The major risks are:

• Excessive capital cost inflation
• Weak internal rate of return
• Lower-than-expected recoveries
• Rare earths not contributing meaningfully
• Additional financing needs
• Further delays

The feasibility study is not simply another corporate update. It is the document that allows investors, lenders, strategic partners, and government agencies to evaluate the current project rather than a version of the project based on older assumptions.

The Traxys Offtake Agreement

Management previously indicated that it expected to finalize and “have a binding situation” concerning the Traxys offtake agreement by the end of April or the early part of May.

As of June 27, 2026, no finalized binding agreement has been announced.

This matters because an enforceable offtake agreement can help demonstrate:

• Commercial demand
• Product marketability
• Revenue visibility
• Counterparty interest
• Lender confidence
• Project bankability

An agreement with Traxys would not finance the mine by itself, but it could strengthen the financing package and reduce commercial uncertainty.

Until a binding agreement is announced, investors should not treat it as completed.

The absence of an announcement does not prove that negotiations have failed. It does mean that the market still lacks the result management previously indicated was approaching completion.

EXIM Financing

NioCorp has requested up to approximately $800 million in financing from the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

That process remains potentially transformative.

A sufficiently large EXIM financing package could:

• Reduce equity dilution
• Lower the weighted cost of capital
• Validate the project
• Attract additional lenders
• Improve negotiations with strategic partners
• Increase the probability of construction

However, the financing is not finalized.

The updated feasibility study is important to EXIM’s due diligence, and commercial agreements, such as offtakes, can also strengthen the financing case.

The proper view is:

EXIM is a major opportunity, not guaranteed money.

Additional Government Involvement

Additional government support could include:

• Department of Defense funding
• Department of Energy support
• Grants
• Stockpile contracts
• Price support
• Loan guarantees
• Strategic investment
• Tax incentives
• Procurement agreements

NioCorp’s alignment with American critical-minerals policy remains an important strength.

Government involvement would not eliminate geological, engineering, or financing risk. It could materially reduce the project’s capital and market risks.

Geopolitical Developments

Deteriorating relations with China could increase the urgency surrounding domestic niobium, scandium, and rare earth supply chains.

This has previously contributed to sharp movements in critical-minerals stocks.

However, relying on geopolitical escalation is not a sound primary thesis.

A sustainable revaluation should come from:

• Project economics
• Binding commercial agreements
• Financing
• Construction progress
• Government commitments

Geopolitical events can accelerate the move, but they cannot substitute permanently for execution.

4. Technical Analysis

The Q3 technical picture is weaker than it was earlier in Q2.

The long-term structure has not completely failed, but both the daily and weekly charts show deteriorating momentum.

The most important conclusion remains the same:

The market wants the feasibility study and the Traxys agreement.

Daily Chart

NioCorp’s daily chart as of the June 26, 2026, after-hours close.

Based on the attached daily chart:

• Price: approximately $4.55, or approximately $4.60 after hours
• 50-day SMA: $5.61
• 100-day SMA: $5.40
• 200-day SMA: $6.04
• 500-day SMA: $3.77
• 1000-day SMA: $4.60
• VWAP: approximately $4.56
• RSI: approximately 35.64
• MACD: negative
• Daily volume: approximately 7.25 million shares

Daily SMA Interpretation

The stock is below:

• The 50-day SMA
• The 100-day SMA
• The 200-day SMA

That is bearish on the short and intermediate daily timeframes.

The stock is approximately at the 1000-day SMA and above the 500-day SMA.

That means the deeper multi-year structure has not completely broken, but price is now testing an important long-term support area.

The daily 50-day SMA remains below the daily 200-day SMA:

50-day SMA: $5.61
200-day SMA: $6.04

That is a bearish moving-average alignment, often associated with a death-cross structure.

The 50-day SMA is above the 100-day SMA, but that relationship is less important while price remains below both averages, and the 50-day remains below the 200-day.

Daily RSI

The daily RSI is approximately 35.64.

That is weak and approaching oversold territory, but it is not yet below the conventional oversold threshold of 30.

The RSI indicates selling pressure, not necessarily an immediate reversal.

Daily MACD

The daily MACD remains below zero, with a negative histogram.

That indicates bearish momentum.

A bullish improvement would require:

• The histogram to turn positive
• The MACD line to cross above the signal line
• Preferably both lines beginning to move toward or above zero

That has not happened yet.

Daily Volume Profile

The yearly daily volume profile shows:

• Point of Control: $6.02
• Value Area Low: $4.87
• Value Area High: $6.73

The Point of Control is the price where the greatest amount of volume traded during the selected period.

The value area is the range containing most of the traded volume, usually approximately 70%, depending on the platform settings.

Current price is below the daily Value Area Low of $4.87.

That is bearish in the immediate term because the stock has moved below the price range where the market previously conducted most of its business.

A reclaim of $4.87 would put price back inside the value area.

The daily Point of Control at $6.02 also sits almost directly on the daily 200-day SMA at $6.04.

That creates an important resistance cluster.

Weekly Chart

NioCorp’s weekly chart as of the June 26, 2026, after-hours close.

Based on the attached weekly chart:

• Price: approximately $4.55
• 50-week SMA: $5.66
• 100-week SMA: $3.83
• 200-week SMA: $4.46
• 500-week SMA: $5.48
• VWAP: approximately $4.78
• RSI: approximately 42.42
• MACD: negative
• Weekly volume: approximately 18.98 million shares

Weekly SMA Interpretation

The stock is below:

• The 50-week SMA
• The 500-week SMA
• Weekly VWAP

That is bearish to neutral.

However, the stock remains slightly above:

• The 200-week SMA at $4.46
• The 100-week SMA at $3.83

That means the longer-term structure is under pressure, but it has not completely failed.

The most important current weekly crossover is:

50-week SMA: $5.66
500-week SMA: $5.48

The 50-week SMA remains above the 500-week SMA.

This is a rare, very long-term bullish relationship. It means the average price over approximately the last year remains above the average price over approximately the last decade.

This is not the conventional golden cross, which usually refers to the 50-period moving average crossing above the 200-period moving average.

However, the weekly 50 SMA is also above the weekly 200 SMA:

$5.66 > $4.46

That is a conventional bullish long-term moving-average alignment.

The problem is that the current price is now below the 50-week and 500-week averages.

The long-term averages remain constructive, but price action has weakened.

Weekly RSI

Weekly RSI is approximately 42.42.

That is below neutral but not oversold.

It indicates weakening momentum without showing full capitulation.

Weekly MACD

Weekly MACD is negative, and the histogram is also negative.

That is bearish.

The weekly chart is not currently showing strong upside momentum.

Weekly Volume Profile

The yearly weekly volume profile shows:

• Point of Control: $5.50
• Value Area Low: $4.71
• Value Area High: $6.53

Current price is below the weekly Value Area Low of $4.71.

That is another sign that the market has rejected the prior accepted trading range, at least temporarily.

The weekly Point of Control at $5.50 is particularly important because it sits near several other indicators:

• Weekly 500 SMA: $5.48
• Weekly Point of Control: $5.50
• 0.618 Fibonacci retracement: $5.59
• Daily 50 SMA: $5.61
• Weekly 50 SMA: $5.66

That creates a major resistance cluster between approximately $5.48 and $5.66.

The daily and weekly volume profiles do not need to produce identical numbers. Different candle aggregation and profile binning can shift the exact values slightly.

Both profiles communicate the same broad message:

The stock is currently below the market’s recent value area and must reclaim that territory before the technical picture improves materially.

5. Fibonacci Retracement

The Fibonacci retracement is drawn from:

• High: $12.58
• Low: $1.27

The important levels are:

• 0.236: $9.91
• 0.382: $8.26
• 0.500: $6.92
• 0.618: $5.59
• 0.786: $3.69
• 1.000: $1.27

The Golden Ratio

The 0.618 Fibonacci retracement at approximately $5.59 is commonly called the Golden Ratio.

Earlier in Q2, NB spent considerable time around this level and attempted to break above it.

That breakout failed.

The stock is now trading materially below the 0.618 level.

This confirms that $5.59 is currently resistance, not support.

The level remains extremely important because it aligns closely with:

• Weekly 500 SMA at $5.48
• Weekly Point of Control at $5.50
• Daily 50 SMA at $5.61
• Weekly 50 SMA at $5.66

A sustained reclaim of this cluster would materially improve the chart.

Lower Fibonacci Support

The next major Fibonacci level below the current price is:

0.786 at $3.69

That level also aligns closely with:

• Daily 500 SMA at $3.77
• Weekly 100 SMA at $3.83

This creates a major lower support zone from approximately $3.69 to $3.83.

A breakdown below the weekly 200 SMA near $4.46 would increase the probability of a test of this lower support area.

6. The Most Important Technical Levels

Immediate Support

$4.46 to $4.60

This area includes:

• Weekly 200 SMA at $4.46
• Daily VWAP near $4.56
• Daily 1000 SMA near $4.60
• Current price

This is the immediate battleground.

A decisive weekly breakdown below this area would weaken the long-term structure.

First Reclaim Zone

$4.71 to $4.87

This area includes:

• Weekly Value Area Low at $4.71
• Weekly VWAP near $4.78
• Daily Value Area Low at $4.87

Reclaiming this zone would move the stock back into the recent value area.

Major Resistance Cluster

$5.40 to $5.66

This area includes:

• Daily 100 SMA at $5.40
• Weekly 500 SMA at $5.48
• Weekly Point of Control at $5.50
• 0.618 Fibonacci level at $5.59
• Daily 50 SMA at $5.61
• Weekly 50 SMA at $5.66

This is the most important resistance cluster on the chart.

Secondary Resistance

$6.02 to $6.53

This area includes:

• Daily Point of Control at $6.02
• Daily 200 SMA at $6.04
• Weekly Value Area High at $6.53

Upper Resistance

$6.73 to $6.92

This area includes:

• Daily Value Area High at $6.73
• 0.500 Fibonacci retracement at $6.92

A sustained move above this region would materially change the technical picture.

7. Technical Conclusion

The current technical setup is weaker than it was at the beginning of Q2.

Bearish signals include:

• Price below both yearly Value Area Low levels
• Price below the daily 50, 100, and 200 SMAs
• Price below the weekly 50 and 500 SMAs
• Negative daily MACD
• Negative weekly MACD
• Failed breakout above the 0.618 Fibonacci level
• RSI below neutral on both charts
• Heavy weekly selling volume

Constructive signals include:

• Price remains near or above the weekly 200 SMA
• Price remains above the daily 500 SMA
• Weekly 50 SMA remains above the weekly 200 SMA
• Weekly 50 SMA remains above the weekly 500 SMA
• The major multi-year base has not completely failed

My interpretation is:

The long-term structure is damaged but not broken. The short-term and intermediate technical picture is bearish.

The chart needs a catalyst.

The obvious catalysts are the feasibility study and a binding Traxys agreement.

8. Management Praise

Ability to Raise Capital:

Management deserves credit for being able to raise approximately $500 million in one year.

Most junior miners cannot do that.

Raising that amount of capital for a development-stage project shows that NioCorp has access to investors and financing channels that many junior miners lack.

That does not eliminate future dilution or financing risk, but it is still a major accomplishment.

Professionalism:

NioCorp maintains professionalism.

For example, executives or official social media accounts associated with MP Materials, United States Antimony, and Critical Metals Corp. have, in my opinion, occasionally acted immaturely.

NioCorp generally avoids that behavior.

Management presents the company professionally in interviews, conferences, filings, and public communications.

That matters when negotiating with:

• Government agencies
• Banks
• Institutional investors
• Defense contractors
• Strategic partners
• Potential customers

Project Quality:

The quality and diversity of the Elk Creek Project deserve praise.

Most junior miners, and miners in general, have one product, perhaps two or three.

NioCorp potentially has seven mineral products, or six if NdPr is treated as one combined product.

Those products include rare earths, whose non-Chinese prices have increased due to China’s export controls, as well as other critical minerals that the United States and the rest of the world need.

A diversified product suite can reduce dependence on the price of one commodity.

It also creates a more complicated processing operation, so diversification is both a strength and an execution challenge.

9. Management Criticism

Repeated Timeline Slips:

NioCorp has missed the timelines it set for itself.

For example, Mark Smith, on April 21, 2026, said he expected to finalize and “have a binding situation” for the Traxys offtake agreement by the end of April or the early part of May.

However, as of June 27, 2026, no such agreement has been announced.

Other examples include repeated timeline misses concerning the updated feasibility study, which moved from expectations surrounding the second half of 2025 into the present.

These two items are critical to advancing the financing process.

Until these items are completed, the stock will likely struggle to go anywhere sustainably unless geopolitical tensions involving China deteriorate sharply, similar to movements seen around April or October 2025.

I am not an experienced businessman like Mark Smith, nor am I a member of management.

However, I do not believe management should give a date or narrow completion range unless it has a high level of confidence that the deadline will be met.

If management does not have a reliable date, it would be better to say that no specific date is available or to provide a much broader timeframe.

A common argument is that timeline slips are normal in the mining industry.

That is true.

For example, USA Rare Earth reportedly expected its approximately $1.6 billion U.S. government transaction to close by the end of Q1 2026. The expected closing was later moved to April, and the transaction reportedly closed on June 3, approximately three months after the original timeline.

The counterargument is that just because delays are common does not make them good or automatically excusable.

Persistent delays are one reason investors discount junior miners so heavily.

I also believe NioCorp management is hurting itself by repeatedly missing self-imposed timelines.

As the company grows, institutional ownership will likely grow as well. Institutional investors are generally less tolerant of repeated timeline misses than long-term retail shareholders.

Continued slippage could eventually place pressure on Mark Smith’s leadership, potentially before the company reaches its highest-growth period.

That does not mean removal is imminent. It means repeated missed timelines create unnecessary governance risk.

Lack of Explanations for the Delays:

Investors can often tolerate delays when management provides a clear explanation.

NioCorp has not adequately explained why the feasibility study and Traxys agreement have taken longer than expected.

Possible explanations could include:

• Engineering revisions
• Updated cost estimates
• Metallurgical work
• Reserve conversion
• Customer negotiations
• Financing conditions
• Legal review
• Government due diligence
• Product pricing assumptions
• Confidential strategic negotiations

Investors do not need every confidential detail.

They do need enough information to understand what remains unfinished and why previously discussed timelines were not met.

Silence increases speculation.

Some investors assume the delays mean high-stakes negotiations are occurring.

Others assume the feasibility study is weak.

Neither conclusion can be proven from the public information.

Management could reduce unnecessary speculation by explaining the categories of work responsible for the delay without disclosing sensitive negotiations.

10. Answers to Common Questions

Question 1: When Will the Updated Feasibility Study Be Released?

I have no idea.

I do not work for NioCorp.

Hopefully sometime in July, but investors should not treat that as guidance or a prediction.

At this point, management should release it when it is complete and accurate rather than provide another narrow timeframe that may be missed.

Question 2: Is the Lack of Insider Buying Concerning?

The lack of insider buying is not strong evidence that the feasibility study or EXIM process is going badly.

The closer NioCorp gets to material nonpublic developments, the less legally able informed insiders may be to purchase shares.

According to NioCorp’s filed insider-trading policy, the company imposes several restrictions.

No Trading While Possessing Material Nonpublic Information

An insider cannot buy, sell or otherwise transact while aware of information a reasonable investor would consider important.

The size of the trade and the insider’s personal reason for trading do not change that restriction.

Mandatory Pre-Clearance

Directors, executive officers, and certain employees must receive approval before trading.

They must certify that they do not possess material nonpublic information.

The company may deny trading permission without providing a public explanation.

Regular Quarterly Blackouts

NioCorp’s scheduled blackouts reportedly begin on:

• March 22
• June 22
• September 22
• December 22

The blackout generally continues until the third business day after the company releases the relevant financial results.

As of June 27, 2026, directors and executives are therefore inside the regular June blackout period.

A voluntary open-market purchase during this period would generally be prohibited unless it occurred through an approved Rule 10b5-1 plan, received permitted prior approval, or qualified for an exemption.

Event-Specific Blackouts

Management may impose confidential event-specific blackouts when material developments are underway.

These blackouts are not publicly announced.

The public, therefore, cannot determine whether insiders were restricted during every trading window since November 2024.

Nobody outside the company can honestly prove either of these claims:

• Management has been continuously prohibited from buying since 2024
• Management has been free to buy throughout that period and deliberately refused

The public evidence does not establish either conclusion.

Information That May Be Material

NioCorp’s policy identifies matters such as the following as potentially material:

• Significant Elk Creek Project developments
• Changes to resources or reserves
• The gain or loss of financing
• Non-routine financing transactions
• Severe liquidity issues
• Significant contracts or customers

That language could encompass:

• The updated feasibility study
• EXIM financing
• Project economics
• Reserve conversion
• The Traxys agreement
• Other major offtake negotiations

The November 2024 Purchases

The last substantial insider cash purchases were connected to the November 2024 private placement rather than ordinary open-market buying.

Reportedly:

• Mark Smith purchased 183,422 units for approximately $324,198
• Dean Kehler purchased 56,577 units for approximately $100,000

Each unit included a common share and warrants.

Those purchases showed a willingness to provide capital directly to the company.

They were not the same signal as executives independently buying common shares in the open market.

Later option grants were compensation-related and did not involve the same out-of-pocket commitment.

My Assessment

Since June 22, 2026, the lack of insider buying is not concerning because the normal blackout period is in effect.

Immediately before a material feasibility study, financing, or offtake announcement, the lack of buying would also not be concerning because insiders may possess material nonpublic information or be subject to an event-specific blackout.

Across every open trading window since November 2024, the absence of voluntary open-market purchases is mildly concerning because it removes one potential vote of confidence.

However, it is not evidence of:

• A bad feasibility study
• A failed EXIM process
• Concealment
• Impending litigation
• Management is expecting the stock to fall

The fair conclusion is:

The absence of recent voluntary insider purchases removes one positive signal, but it does not prove that management is hiding bad news.

Note: All sources used to answer this will be linked at the very bottom of this post.

Question 3: Does the Traxys Delay Mean the Agreement Is Dead?

No.

The absence of an announcement does not prove the negotiations have failed.

It does not mean investors should not value the agreement as completed.

A verbal expectation, memorandum, or negotiation is not the same as a binding commercial agreement.

The proper position is to wait for the signed terms and evaluate them when disclosed.

Question 4: Is EXIM Financing Guaranteed?

No.

NioCorp’s EXIM application and lender engagement are meaningful, but financing is not guaranteed until definitive agreements are signed and all conditions are satisfied.

Investors should distinguish among:

• Application
• Letter of interest
• Due diligence
• Indicative term sheet
• Final commitment
• Financial close
• Funding

Those are separate stages.

Question 5: Is the Feasibility Study Guaranteed to Be Bullish?

No.

The feasibility study could be:

• Strong
• Acceptable
• Mixed
• Weak

Important variables include:

• Capital cost
• Operating cost
• Internal rate of return
• Recovery rates
• Rare earth economics
• Reserve size
• Mine life
• Financing requirements
• Commodity assumptions

The release itself is not automatically bullish.

The content matters.

Question 6: Why Has the Stock Not Gone Anywhere?

Because the market is waiting for the information required to value the project.

The technical chart reflects that uncertainty.

The stock failed at the Golden Ratio around $5.59, fell below both yearly volume-profile value areas, and is now testing major long-term support near $4.46 to $4.60.

The market needs proof.

That proof is most likely to come from:

• The updated feasibility study
• A binding Traxys agreement
• Material EXIM progress
• Additional government involvement

Question 7: What Would Move the Stock Higher?

The most important bullish catalysts are:

1. A credible and economically strong feasibility study (critical)
2. A binding Traxys offtake agreement (critical)
3. A meaningful EXIM financing milestone (critical, and preferably finalization of financing)
4. Additional U.S. government support
5. Strategic investment or partnership
6. Confirmation that rare earths are economically recoverable
7. Manageable capital expenditures
8. Strong recovery rates
9. A clear construction financing plan
10. Renewed geopolitical urgency concerning the Chinese critical mineral supply

The feasibility study and Traxys agreement are the most immediate items.

Without them, sustainable upside will be difficult unless the entire critical-minerals sector is pulled higher by geopolitical events.

Question 8: NioCorp Management Needs to Take a Pay Cut. Have They?

NioCorp's executive compensation in 2025 relative to 2024.

Mark Smith's compensation graph, 2019-present.

Yes.

Based on NioCorp’s 2025 proxy compensation figures, the company’s three leading executives saw total compensation fall by roughly half compared with 2024:

• Mark Smith, CEO: approximately $451,000, down 53.32%
• Scott Honan, COO: approximately $364,000, down 48.55%
• Neal Shah, CFO: approximately $334,000, down 50.70%

For Mark Smith specifically, his 2025 compensation fell back near the levels seen around 2020 and 2021.

His reported 2025 compensation consisted of:

• $325,000 salary
• $126,000 in stock or option awards
• $0 bonus
• $451,000 total compensation

So the claim that management has ignored the company’s delays while continuing to increase its own compensation would not be accurate for 2025.

Management did take a substantial compensation reduction.

That deserves acknowledgment.

However, it does not erase the criticism regarding missed timelines, the delayed feasibility study, or the unfinished Traxys agreement. Compensation discipline is a positive governance signal, but execution remains the main issue investors are watching.

11. Major Risks Entering Q3

Further Delays

Another quarter without the feasibility study or Traxys agreement would likely damage credibility further.

A Weak Feasibility Study

A weak feasibility study is one of the largest fundamental risks entering Q3.

The study could disappoint through:

• Excessive capital expenditures
• Weak internal rate of return
• Lower-than-expected recoveries
• Higher operating costs
• Limited rare earth contribution
• Reduced reserves
• Shorter mine life
• Aggressive commodity assumptions
• Greater financing requirements
• Greater equity dilution risk

The release of the feasibility study is not automatically a positive catalyst.

A weak study could confirm that the project is technically possible, but not sufficiently attractive or financeable under realistic assumptions.

Investors should focus on the contents of the study rather than celebrate the release itself.

Capital Expenditure Inflation

If the updated project cost rises materially above prior estimates, NioCorp may require:

• Additional debt
• Additional equity
• Strategic capital
• Government grants
• A larger financing package

Weak Economics

A low internal rate of return or weak project margins would reduce financing interest.

Dilution

NioCorp has raised substantial capital, but future equity issuance remains possible.

Financing Risk

EXIM and other financing sources are not finalized.

Processing Complexity

Producing six or seven products is a major opportunity, but the flowsheet is more complex than that of a single-product mine.

Commercial Scale-Up

High recoveries achieved in test work do not guarantee identical recoveries at commercial scale.

Offtake Risk

Commercial interest does not become bankable revenue until binding agreements are signed.

Management Credibility

Repeated timeline misses can reduce investor trust even when the underlying project remains sound.

Commodity Pricing

Higher non-Chinese critical-mineral prices support the thesis, but the project must remain viable under conservative long-term pricing rather than temporary shortage prices.

12. Q3 Bull and Bear Cases

Bull Case

The feasibility study is released and demonstrates:

• Manageable capital expenditures
• Competitive operating costs
• Credible recoveries
• Economic rare earth production
• Acceptable internal rate of return
• A clear path toward EXIM financing

Traxys is finalized as a binding agreement.

The stock reclaims:

• $4.71 to $4.87
• $5.48 to $5.66
• $6.02 to $6.04

A move through $6.53 to $6.92 would then materially improve the long-term chart.

Bear Case

The feasibility study is delayed again, or it contains weak economics.

The Traxys agreement remains unfinished.

The stock loses:

• Daily 1000 SMA near $4.60
• Weekly 200 SMA near $4.46

That would expose the major lower support cluster around:

• $3.69 Fibonacci level
• $3.77 daily 500 SMA
• $3.83 weekly 100 SMA

A breakdown below that region would materially damage the long-term technical thesis.

This is the end of part 1. Sources and my final take will be listed in part 2.

Walrus

Hi guys,

Most of my investment analysis is done in the form of analyzing institutional order flow for tickers. Often times, you can see the big players setting up for a move well before it happens.

NOTE: this is NOT FINANCIAL ADVICE and take what I say with a grain of salt as I could be wrong. I am not trying to lead you guys on or give us any false hope that we're gonna see $10+, I don't know with certainty where this might go. Also, I am not a sponsor for Volumeleaders or anything like that, I just really like the platform and how they represent data.

But to get to the point of this post, today at closing we saw the 3rd largest institutional transaction in the entire history of this ticker: 4,182,093 shares transacted at $4.55, a little bit more than 19 million dollars.

https://preview.redd.it/3w68znuydp9h1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=30184c5ca89a68f26fa11a644914d476e9b2cbab

I'll do a quick rundown of this chart and what everything means. The chart above is for the past 3 years showing the top 10 largest transactions in that time span. Incidentally, it also so happens to also be the top 10 of all time. Each bubble represents a trade that was done and at what price it occurred at. Their assigned number is where they rank all time with the dataset going back to 2004. The color of the circle means whether the transaction happened on the lit market or dark market, just a point of data that I don't think is really relevant for us. The dotted lines represent "Trade Levels"; prices that have seen large amounts of institutional activity. Often times, we see these levels act as support/resistance. You can see a bit more clearly in the charts below how price tends to "bounce" between the levels.

The tables below show the numbers of when, how much, and at what price that these trades happened at:

Also note the Trade Clusters table here. A Trade Cluster is similar to a trade whereas instead of a singular transaction happening, it's multiple happening within a few minutes of each other, all around the same price. Trade Cluster's usually result in a Trade Level being formed so for our conversation today, we'll just focus on the levels.

The Trade Levels table at the bottom of that screenshot shows the top 5 largest levels. Only filtering for transactions at the $5.60 level where we saw #3 hit today:

https://preview.redd.it/9r6a40ntdp9h1.png?width=1543&format=png&auto=webp&s=95f6215d4e5ecc299c2b7dd2f14a0a3932efc8c5

We see that this level at $4.60 has been a spot where we've seen alot of bullish positioning built up for Niocorp before a nice pump and with today's number 3 rolling in right at this level and news that the DFS will come "in a few weeks", I'm feeling fairly optimistic that a large move (hopefully up) is being loaded in the barrel by the big players.

Do note that this entire time, I've called everything a trade or transaction. We do not know whether these moves are buys or sells, only that something happened and today someone made the 3rd largest move ever.

https://preview.redd.it/0f7qn0rvdp9h1.png?width=1544&format=png&auto=webp&s=910abe5b84c0643dcfd9c01848f5013decba6e3d

Just the past year has been crazy for Niocorp, without a doubt the most institutionally involved year that this ticker has ever seen. Whether they are loading up on shares or dumping it all onto us, remains to be discovered. I am hoping to see a push back to $6.50 sometime soonish and if we manage to beat that damned $6.50 level, the sky's the limit.

But I would love to hear what you guys think of this data and if you want some more charts or explanations or for me to expand on anything, feel free to ask. I'm just a silly little retail trader with a day job.

ADDENDUM (Added 6 hours after the initial post)

I completely forgot that Niocorp is already part of the Russell 3000 and therefore is a part of the Russell Reconstitution today. Doesn't necessarily mean this information is meaningless though. This is another chart of the last 3 years of trades, except this time, showing the top 50 trades:

https://preview.redd.it/ehugwqg29r9h1.png?width=1546&format=png&auto=webp&s=a23386bf1df018a43a55a3ac156dc086af9c7482

After some more digging, I realized that number 6 print (the furthest most left bubble) is a result from last year's Russell rebalancing where Niocorp was first added to the Russell 3000 (4,397,393 shares @ $2.48). After that, institutional activity really started picking up with large transactions happening everywhere. This time around, Niocorp wasn't removed from the index (hooray) but I can't seem to find much information on how they chose to rebalance each market sector. Regardless, there is definitely something special with this price level we're sitting on (we even pumped AH today to close exactly on $4.60).

https://preview.redd.it/yiv1ukd9ar9h1.png?width=1549&format=png&auto=webp&s=83a33e0f1846394eb250ee16286d7e536d9b5d4a

I will be keeping an eye for any further announcements on how they chose to rebalance the sectors for the indexes and small caps. Hoping for additional weight for the Materials sector.

https://connectorsupplier.com/markets/materials/

Article Contributed By Materion

Niobium (Nb) and tantalum (Ta) are refractory metals with a growing role across some of the most technically demanding industries in the world. From superconducting magnets and rocket propulsion to miniaturized electronics and next-generation medical implants, these metals share a number of foundational characteristics that make them attractive for advanced engineering applications.

What are niobium and tantalum?

Niobium and tantalum belong to Group 5 of the periodic table and are classified as refractory metals — a category defined by exceptionally high melting points, resistance to heat and wear, and stability under extreme conditions. They feature:

• High achievable purity levels
• Excellent resistance to corrosion, including attack by hot concentrated acids
• Good thermal conductivity paired with a low coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE)
• Opacity to radiation, supporting shielding and barrier applications
• Excellent oxide stability at elevated temperatures
• High ductility at room temperature, which aids forming and fabrication
• Isotropic mechanical behavior

The two metals also have distinct characteristics that make each suited to different roles.

Tantalum

Tantalum is notable for its extreme corrosion resistance. It withstands attack by hot acids and liquid metals better than almost any other metal in common industrial use. With a melting point of 2,996 °C, it retains structural integrity in environments where most alloys would soften or fail. Its high density provides effective radiation shielding, and its unusually high dielectric constant allows it to store substantial electrical charge in a very compact form, making it valuable in the capacitor market and miniaturized electronics.

Niobium

Niobium shares tantalum’s general toughness but is distinguished by its superconducting behavior. Below a transition temperature of 9.2 K, niobium conducts electricity with zero resistance, making it a core material for high-field electromagnets in particle physics and medical imaging. Its alloys also exhibit strong creep resistance and retain mechanical integrity at high temperatures. Niobium-bearing materials are found in aerospace propulsion systems.

Key applications by industry

Interconnect technology

Tantalum and tantalum nitride (TaN) are the established standard for diffusion barrier layers in copper interconnect systems. When Intel introduced copper damascene wiring in the late 1990s, replacing aluminum, one of the enabling materials was tantalum — applied by physical vapor deposition (PVD) sputtering as an ultra-thin liner between the copper conductor and the surrounding low-k dielectric. Without this barrier, copper atoms migrate into the dielectric and silicon substrate over time, degrading transistor performance and causing device failure. Tantalum’s combination of electrical conductivity, adhesion to both copper and dielectric materials, and resistance to copper diffusion makes it uniquely suited to this role. Niobium and niobium nitride (NbN) are also used to form the Josephson junctions and transmission line resonators that are central to superconducting qubit architectures.

Electronics and semiconductors

More than half of annual global tantalum production goes toward capacitor manufacturing, with these components serving as mission-critical parts in avionics, guidance systems, and communications equipment. Tantalum is also deposited as a thin-film barrier layer in semiconductor fabrication, preventing diffusion between copper interconnects and surrounding dielectric materials in advanced microchip architectures.

Chemical processing

Both metals are valued in chemical plant equipment for their ability to withstand aggressive process environments that would rapidly corrode stainless steel or other common engineering alloys.

Energy and power systems

Niobium is central to the superconducting magnets that confine plasma in Tokamak fusion reactors, where it must perform reliably under intense cryogenic and electromagnetic conditions. In energy storage, niobium-based mixed oxides are being developed as anode materials for lithium-ion batteries, offering faster charge rates, improved ionic conductivity, enhanced thermal safety, and longer cycle life compared to conventional graphite anodes — a potentially significant advance for electric vehicle and grid storage applications.

Medical devices and implants

Tantalum is chemically inert in the body and well-tolerated by tissue, making it suitable for a range of implantable devices. Additive manufacturing techniques now allow engineers to fabricate tantalum structures with porous geometries that closely replicate the architecture of bone.

Aerospace and defense

Niobium-based alloys are standard materials in rocket propulsion nozzles for both launch vehicles and satellites, where thermal loads and oxidizing conditions demand both high-temperature strength and dimensional stability. Tantalum is increasingly incorporated into layered shielding structures designed to protect satellite electronics in low-Earth orbit from radiation degradation.

Supply chain risks and critical mineral status

The strategic value of niobium and tantalum is complicated by the geographic concentration of their production. Brazil accounts for roughly 90 percent of global niobium output, with Canada supplying most of the remainder. Tantalum production is more fragmented but heavily weighted toward Central Africa.

This concentration creates supply risk. The absence of domestic U.S. production has led the Department of the Interior to designate both metals on the Critical Minerals List, recognizing their importance to national security and industrial competitiveness. The U.S. Energy Act of 2020 and related policy initiatives have since directed attention toward supply diversification, secondary processing capacity, and recycling infrastructure.

For industries that depend on these materials, the supply picture underscores the value of long-term sourcing relationships, inventory strategy, and engagement with alternative supply development — whether through new mining projects, recycling programs, or materials substitution research.

https://news.umich.edu/can-north-america-mine-enough-rare-earth-elements/

"In the quest to create a robust supply chain of rare earth elements necessary for the clean energy revolution and everyday modern conveniences, North America has enough deposits of sufficient quality to begin looking in its own backyard, according to a University of Michigan study."

"Our results show that all of the deposits in North America, with the exception of the Mountain Pass mine in California that is already in operation, are of lower quality than those that are in operation in China and Australia. But that doesn’t mean they can’t be produced,” Kesler said. “The bottom line is that the deposits are close enough in quality that they might be able to support a domestic supply chain with a little government support, particularly if the prices remain high. The increased costs of mining rare earths in a supply chain of this type might be offset by savings in other parts of the processing and manufacturing stages.”

Here's the UM study - Elk Creek is included - Onshoring North American rare earth mining

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092134492600251X

"Grade and tonnage estimates for North American deposits (Table 1) show a surprisingly wide range of values that reflects two main factors. First, in earlier episodes of rare earth exploration, uncertainty about future pricing and demand [see 2011 rare earth price spike (Terazawa, 2023)] encouraged exploration of deposits that are less attractive today. Second, most rare earth deposits are also enriched in other elements. Examples in North America include Crater Lake (scandium), Echo Ridge (uranium), Elk Creek (niobium), Coastal Sand (titanium, zirconium), Kaolin Sand (kaolin), and Brook (coal). These elements can add value, sometimes to the extent that rare earths would be a by-product or co-product of the operation, but they can also complicate the formation of a rare earth mineral concentrate that is suitable for hydrometallurgical extraction of individual elements. Very little quantitative information is available on most of these additional elements."

https://preview.redd.it/l1mktrznt3ah1.png?width=720&format=png&auto=webp&s=648c6565e1c2588370f1bb8cb9bd63dd3a50de50

"Grade-tonnage relations for North American deposits (Fig. 3) confirm that Mountain Pass has a higher grade and total rare earth content (5.5% TREO, 2.36 Mt TREO) than other known North American deposits. Several other carbonatite-type deposits, including Bear Lodge, Niobec, Wicheeda, and Hoidas Lake, have grades above about 2% TREO, but only Bear Lodge has a total rare earth resource (2.7% TREO, 1.48 Mt TREO) approaching that of Mountain Pass. Other hard rock deposits with a large total rare earth resource include the Ashram, Elk Creek, and Montviel carbonatite deposits and the Halleck Creek, Nechalacho, and Strange Lake alkaline deposits."

https://www.juniorminingnetwork.com/newswire/202215-billions-flow-into-critical-minerals-as-west-races-to-reduce-supply-risk.html

>"Critical minerals have moved from a specialty corner of the commodity market to the center of industrial policy. Western governments are committing tens of billions of dollars to secure domestic supplies of rare earth elements, niobium, scandium, and other materials considered essential to defense, energy, and advanced manufacturing applications. Approximately 92% of global rare earth processing capacity currently resides in China, and the U.S. Geological Survey's Final 2025 Critical Minerals List placed niobium in its top 10 by economic risk to the U.S."

>
"U.S. Niobium Peer Advances Toward Construction

>NioCorp Developments Ltd. (NASDAQ: NB), developer of the Elk Creek Critical Minerals Project in southeast Nebraska, reported a record cash balance of $307 million as of December 31, 2025 after raising more than $370 million during the year. The project targets niobium, scandium, titanium, and potentially rare earth elements. The company received a $10 million award from the Department of Defense under the Defense Production Act and is advancing a project financing package of nearly $800 million currently under review by the U.S. Export-Import Bank. A joint development agreement with Lockheed Martin focuses on scandium-based defense applications, including prototype aluminum-scandium components for advanced aircraft."

I think a lot of the frustration around the feasibility study comes from the early timelines sounding simpler than the reality of the project. And to be fair, Mark wasn’t trying to mislead anyone — he was giving the best estimates he had at the time. The problem is that Elk Creek isn’t a normal project, and the deeper the team got into the technical work, the more complicated it became.

A multi‑mineral carbonatite is one of the hardest deposit types in the mining world. You’re not just proving up one commodity — you’re proving up niobium, scandium, titanium, & multiple rearearths and the interactions between all of these circuits. Every time the metallurgy gets refined, it affects the engineering. Every time the engineering shifts, it affects the economics. It’s a domino chain.

Then layer on the fact that this isn’t just any feasibility study — it has to meet EXIM‑level, lender‑grade standards. That means more test work, more pilot work, more third‑party verification, and a much higher bar for what counts as “done.” Add in the underground design and the Traxys agreement taking longer than expected, and the schedule naturally stretched.

So when people ask why the dates slipped, the answer in my opinion is: the project turned out to be harder than anyone expected, and the team adjusted as the technical reality became clearer.

If anything, the delays show they chose accuracy over shortcuts. And for a project that’s supposed to run for decades, that’s the right call, Imo.

@ 25:08 - "So the Department of Defense, as part of the $10 million grant that you can see here on the right hand side of the slide, about $1 million of that was designated for our research into how can we convert scandium high purity oxide into scandium metal, because we cannot do that here in the US today.  And we have two customers that want to buy scandium metal today so we have done the research.

We found two technologies that we liked, we liked one better than the other, and so we’ve actually tried that and about two weeks ago, we made our first Scandium metal.  We’re waiting for the final analysis to come out on that effort, but everything looks fantastic in terms of what the scandium metal looks like and all the other parameters that we were measuring.  We do need to get the analytics yet. That would be a huge win for the United States because we do not produce any scandium metal in the United States today and this will be an environmentally acceptable way to make scandium metal as well, because  in other parts of the world where scandium metal is made, that would never be able to be permitted here in the United States, so we have a method that will be permit-able and it looks like it could be a very economic."

Presentation is Slide 4 of the current NioCorp deck

My name is Bill Peterson US Metals and Mining analyst. We're pleased to have NioCorp for this track. So, we have Mark Smith who’s the CEO he’s gonna be able to speak to the slide for a little bit. I have a bunch of questions but certainly happy to take your questions as well so Mark, thanks sir. Welcome to our natural resources conference.

Mark-Thank you Bill an honor; a privilege to be here. I’ll start out with it. Just a very quick overview of some things that you’ll find very important for the company right now let’s start in the green section 1st. We are going to be a Greenfield mining project with a below ground mine underground mine in an above ground processing facility we will produce all of our products in their final form for customers, so this is not an operation where we produce concentrates send them somewhere else to be processed and hope that they get a good price. We’re gonna be producing final products on site. We are fully permitted. We are located in the very south east corner of the state of Nebraska. It’s a very very good state to do business in and the corporate tax rate has gone down I think twice already since we’ve started our efforts of permitting and in construction, and I would suggest that they will probably be looking at further tax reduction so very business friendly we have a poly metallic ore body very very large to the 38 year mine life that we publicize in our 2022 feasibility study only constitutes about 10% of the total size of the ore body so this this mine was built an operational will be here for literally centuries, not decades. This is gonna be there for a long long time. The polymetallic nature of this ore body allows us to to get multiple products out of it. We’re primarily there for the Nb, which is Niobium. The Niobium is really ubiquitous in our economy. Every building that you see that’s two stories are higher, has certain yield strength properties that the steel that they construct the building has to meet and they do that by adding Niobium to the steel and you only need 1 pound of Niobium for 2000 pounds of steel and you achieve that double the yield straight requirements and you meet the building specs as a result of that we were primarily there for the Niobium, but it is poly metallic so we’ll have multiple byproducts so we get to produce from the mine as well well that includes Sc which is scandium. Scandium think of it a lot like Niobium actually except you add just a little bit of scandium to aluminum, and you can increase the yield strength of the aluminum and the alloy will be a lighter weight alloy is compared to aluminum as well will produce TI or titanium will produce NdPr, which is neodymium praseodymium. That’s a rare earth material and it’s the primary component of a permanent rare earth magnet, which is very important to our economy and then will produce a DY which is dysprosium. It will also produce terbium Tb both considered heavy rare earth elements and they are very important again. You don’t need very much of them but when you need them, you absolutely have to have them and there are no substitutes today and what they serve is that they can actually make that NdPr. magnet a higher temperature magnet so when you hit about 200°F with just an ordinary NdPr magnet, the magnet loses loses all of its magnetic capability and when it goes back below 200° you don’t gain the magnetic properties back it’s gone so military the EV‘s, wind turbines all the robotics in the world, they all require high temperature where rare earth permanent magnets, and therefore you have to add either Dy or Tb to achieve that high temperature capacity so these are interesting elements for the United States and actually multiple countries almost all countries around the world in that Niobium we import 100% of that material into the United States today we produce zero Sc, we import 100% today. Ti, we import about 85% NdPr. We probably import greater than 95% of that today and Dy Tb we import 100% as well so with that that really strong reliance on foreign sources needless to say the United States government has taken a very large interest in this project and want to see it up and running and so we’ve been looking at different ways now that we’ve got a lot of the technical work behind us and the de-risking of the project is complete. We’re now in the financing mode and you can see in the middle column we were able to raise over $500 million since early 2025. We have zero debt and zero convertible debt on our ballot sheet so we are as clean as it can be if we go out all the way over on the right hand side you can see where the rest of the finance and would come in the lower right hand corner. We’re looking at about a $780 million loan from the US Export Import Bank (EXIM). We’ve been working on that loan and this is this isn’t a letter of interest we did that over three years ago. We’re actually we filed our application and we’ve been going through the due diligence process. We’ve been going through that for two years and 11 months now so we are just about there with EXIM. They’re waiting for two things from us and we hope to deliver those two things within the next few weeks and the EXIM process should reach conclusion very quickly; that will complete the project financing in terms of debt and the equity since we raised over $500 million and then final item here that we just announced I believe it was in in April that with the exception of the 50% of our FerroNiobium that is under contract already with Thyssenkrupp out of Germany everything else will be sold to Traxys USA; that really puts us in a very good position with EXIM and allows us to complete that loan process once that is finalized which should also be in the “next few weeks here” they use that offtake as is kind of the way to calculate debt capacity and ability to repay so we should be able to bring that EXIM loan home very quickly so we’re a long ways down the road. All the permitting is done. The tactical work is done, although we’re updating it and it should be published here in the next few weeks project financing is largely behind us. We need to get EXIM authorization and that should be within the next few months as well so it’s an exciting time in the company we’re getting ready to start construction. We hope to start construction late 2026. It’ll be a three-year construction project and we can start producing some of these minerals in the United States, which we are not doing right now, so Bill thank you for that opportunity and I would be happy to answer any questions

Bill-Spend a little time on the periodic table first, market environment, policy, move on the project like that is the name of the company that’s also primary use to strengthen steel high-rise things like that hundred percent out of China I guess, how does that influence the market I mean I don’t know if that has been the rare perspective primarily of NDP as well as the program I’ve seen some pretty strong export controls. How’s it working?

Mark-I said that was my mistake. If I said that Niobium is actually there’s three producing mines in the world today I misunderstood no problem. It’s an area. By the way there’s one small mine out of Canada. They produce about 4% of the world Niobium needs there’s another small mine in Brazil that produces about 6% of the world and needs and then there’s a very large mine in Brazil that produces about 90% of the Niobium that we need in the world today I was on the board of directors for the large company, CBMM, very proud of that association and what a great company. They have created a very, very stable pricing environment for Niobium and the steel companies love that because the steel companies like to put their annual business plan together, they like to make sure they meet that plan and they get their bonuses at the end of the year, so Niobium is one of their favorite products although it sounds like it’s 96% in Brazil and 4% in Canada. We should take a step back and understand that there is a Chinese connection here. For all practical purposes it was Chinese money that purchased the Canadian operation some years back probably more than 10 years ago.  About 10 years ago a Chinese mine corporation purchased the smaller Brazilian mine in Brazil and in 2012 China actually took a 15% interest in CBMM. So my point being here, number one, China is the largest user of Niobium in the world. That goes almost hand-in-hand with being the largest steel maker. They viewed Niobium as a critical strategic mineral well advance of the United States which took that that opinion, and they took care of that issue they have made their investments and they have their ownership and they have their Niobium under control for their for their country even though it’s all outside of China and it’s interesting to note. Also, China doesn’t have any Niobium resources in country so they had to go outside of China to secure this critical strategic material; very important.

Bill-Scandium, define what that looks like as well, we had a lot of aerospace companies so it’s been reported you are in a partnership with Lockheed Martin regarding these sort of alloys that are important for jets and other platforms. I guess what you can say publicly can you speak to that or maybe even more broadly and how these are used this is it really

Mark- Scandium is exciting because it’s unknown nobody knows about Sc and there’s only about 35 tons of this Sc material produced in the world today so less than two truckloads of scandium were produced in the world today. NioCorp once we’re up and running nameplate capacity we will be producing about 100 tons so about five truckloads of this material. The uses of Sc have been well known for 20, 30, 40 years and the latent demand for Sc is probably upwards of 3000 tons per year. The problem is always been on the supply side. There just isn’t a secure there isn’t a reliable supply of the material and pricing for scandium has really been a problem as well. Because it is so scarce the price was was quite high for some period of time. China announce several years ago that they wanted to control the Scandium market and so they did their normal routine when they want to do that. They started to produce more cause it used to be probably 15 to 20 tons per year so they started to produce a little bit more and they also dropped the price so instead of about $3500 a kilogram which it was before they announced that it all of a sudden dropped to about $700 per kilogram but on April 4, 2025 China included scandium on the list of seven heavy rare earths that they were going to restrict export export of. And they’ve done a good job of restricting that there is no scandium that’s leaving China right now so now we end up with bifurcated pricing and China has been successful with keeping Sc about about $700 a kilogram in China but outside of China, it’s doing much like all the other rare earths. It’s escalating quite rapidly and today scandium is selling outside of China anywhere from about $3000 a kilogram to $6500 a kilogram. There’s not much available we have a very small scandium alloy business that we are trying to to create for the end users of that alloy in country here in the US and the Department of Defense / Department of War really asked us to make that happen so we’ve made that happen. We’re actually out in the market trying to buy scandium because until we produce it at the mine that’s how we get our feed stock for this business and so that $3000 to $6500 is actual immediately available market information that we’re getting day by day as we’re trying to buy Sc to prepare the Scandium aluminum alloy for companies like Lockheed Martin. Lockheed Martin, great partnership with them, they have a couple of different uses for for the Scandium aluminum alloys is they’re using it to enhance the technology on the fighter jets to make our pilots safer and as they say more lethal, it’s always an interesting conversation when you have safe in those types of words with people, but basically it’s gonna take it from a Generation 5 to a Generation 6 fighter technology level and that’s all because of the scandium that’s in that alloy the other thing that they’re doing now and they found that they’re using composites to a large degree on the front end of the wings for these fighter jets and what they found is that they can use scandium aluminum alloy in lieu of the composite they can save money. It’s easier to work with than the composites and and they feel that this is going to be a better overall choice for them in the long run, that’s music to our ear cause that means more demand for scandium and it’s with a partner that we already know and we have a great relationship with, so very excited about scandium to say the least and look forward to. You’re really continuing to develop the market for scandium and make sure that the world that uses scandium knows that there’s a reliable supplier of that here in the United States.

Bill- moving along this sort of semi periodic table so titanium it is a designated critical mineral along with I don’t know several dozen others, but um it’s also more commodity product unlike some of these ones you just spoke to the opportunities with the direction of titanium

Mark-so we’re gonna produce a product called titanium tetrachloride, which is in the titanium world is known as tickle and tickle is a precursor to making titanium sponge and titanium sponge is the metallic version of titanium. There are three facilities in the United States that have historically purchased tickle and then produced titanium sponge. All three of those are shut down right now, so our customers today would have to be out of Japan or Europe and readily available customers so that’s not an issue, but I think that with the with the recognition by the Department of War / Department of Defense as of the last couple of months in particular, how important and how truly critical strategic titanium is to their operations, you think about the fighter jets and what not those are upwards of 70% by weight titanium so all of a sudden they’re starting to think about how important titanium is we’re hoping that we can continue to work with some of the previous owners of those titanium sponge plants and potentially get our tickle material moved into plants here in the United States that can create the sponge and create the metal that we ultimately need.

Bill-a bunch of companies more of the traditional, traditional, rare earths and heavies. I guess you and your plans to have the Nebraska project make both both of these products talk about having a large indicated Tb and second Dp any Pr what’s your ore body like? What’s the concentration the ore body?

Mark- The ore body for rare earths in particular is really really a perfect situation for mining because the ore grade for the rare earths in the resource is just as constant. This can be we could have fluctuations of niobium and scandium and in titanium, but the rare earths ore grade is just perfect for us so it creates a very good processing situation then because you have a steady head grade going into your processing units the total rare earth oxides or grade in the in the resource measures added about 0.35% on its own as a primary rare producer you would never mine this ore body solely to produce rare earths. We can do it because it’s going to be a byproduct of of our overall production scheme here and it allows us to take that lower ore grade to capture very significant value out of out of these rare earths, especially in the market today and the market for rare earths much like scandium mentioned a minute ago it’s really bifurcated pricing right now so NdPr ever since July 2025 when MP materials got their floor price of $110 I believe it was the price went from about $55 a kilogram in China up to $110. I think it’s about $110 - $115 a kilogram in China today and it’s about $125 outside of China today. The Dy and the Tb are very different because they really, there’s a lot of talk and a lot of people saying that that they are either are going to produce it or have produced it but outside of China there’s basically zero Dy and Tb being produced today and what that has created is an extreme situation for price bifurcation much like scandium sales for about $250 a kilogram in China today it sells for about $1500 a kilogram outside of China, terbium slightly worse, it sells for about $1000 a kilogram inside of China and now it’s upwards of $4500-$5000 a kilogram outside of China so we view the revenue from the NdPr. The Dy the Tb is being a significant add-on to our 2022 feasibility study where we did not include rare earth magnetic products in our suite. We’re adding those now because we have done the geologic work and metallurgical work to demonstrate that we can produce these products. We can produce them consistently and it will add a very nice additional revenue stream for us.

Bill- in this sort of policy support and have you mentioned MP with price floor and price for the Sierra Verde project as well but do you see the government expanding price for mechanisms to these other other producers first and then the other metals between the ones you have?

Mark- We absolutely see that as a continuing practice there were some articles that came out I don’t know if six or seven months ago saying that no more that would happen and from what I understand that federal employee no longer works for the US government and we’ve had cases since then where the US government is establishing floor prices for these minerals so that’s happening. I think we’re also seeing the President used the powers he has under Section 232 as they’re called it under the Department of Commerce and he’s basically taken the position that they demonstrated through all their studies how critical/strategic all these minerals are and he’s going to use his ability to assess duties for these critical/strategic materials if they flood into the country at inappropriate pricing, he’s gonna use duties to prop those prices up. We know Project Vault as well; we don’t know a lot of the details behind that yet we’re learning more and more about it every day but I guess my simplistic thinking is that if the EXIM is gonna put $10 billion of loan money into a project that covers these products I think almost my definition the price has to continue to go up or EXIM’s not gonna be able to make any money on that loan so we review all of these activities as very promising. We count it as solid traction to make sure that these materials are properly priced and it can be competitive in the world.

Bill-so come to the project in Southeast Nebraska they’re project where the project stand and I guess I guess we think about commercial production of these metals

Mark-we’ve done, we’re updating our 2022 feasibility study that we hope to have that done in the next few weeks so I’m always thinking ahead so in my mind, you know the technical de risking basically behind us to a large the financing is there we have to finish things up with with EXIM, but we’re very very close on that and the next step is gonna be starting construction and assuming that we continue to move as progressively as we are with EXIM we should have financing in place this year. We should start full construction before the end of 2026 it’s a three-year construction project and we should start producing some of these products in late 2029 have a full year production in 2030.

Bill-I don’t know but how does your flow sheet compare? Are you gonna be separate or all these don’t sound good for like the flow sheet for these?

Mark-so I won’t get into that. I’ll spend another day with you on the flow sheet. We welcome. It’s a different flow sheet and the other three Niobium producers of the world are using. They basically use floatation as their first step and they have large crystal structures so they can do that and do it effectively and costly. We have a very fine grain material and it’s very intergrained and so we’re actually using full Hydromet so we’re dissolving the ore into an acid, and then once the into the acid, the scandium and the magnetic rare earth go into the liquid portion and the Niobium in the titanium going to the solid portion we split them and then the simple side is the Sc and the magnetic rare that’s just solvent extraction at that point so it’s very straightforward all known technologies I might add as well.

Bill-Is this more OPEX intensive or CAPEX intensive?

Mark-in that case typically you spend more OPEX on Hydromet than you will for the gravity separation techniques and then the OPEX it can go either way depending on what the price of acid is.

Bill-what are the key agents here?

Mark-Sulfuric acid, Hydrochloric acid and and natural gas will be three primary feed stocks we have to bring in.

Bill- um, you kind of alluded, but the scandium supply chain OEM supply chain, especially related to this masteralloy. It’s investment before the mine can you provide details on that commercial strategy?

Mark- Our commercial strategy is to fill as much of the supply chain for scandium as we can in the United States because we had a virtually zero in the United States in terms of scandium production, and in terms of the ability to convert that to a Scandium metal or Scandium aluminum master alloy. So, the Department of Defense is part of the $10 million grant that you can see here on the right hand side of the slide about $1 million of that was designated for our research into how can we convert scandium oxide into scandium metal because we cannot do that here in the US today and we have two customers that want to buy scandium metal today so we have done the research. We found two technologies that we like we liked one better than the other and so we’ve actually tried that in about two weeks ago, we made our first Scandium metal we’re waiting for the final analysis to come out on that effort, but everything looks fantastic in terms of what the scandium metal looks like and in all the other parameters that we were measuring, we do need to get to analytics yet that would be a huge win for the United States because we do not produce any Scandium metal in the United States today and this will be an environmentally acceptable way to make scandium metal as well because other parts of the world where scandium metal is made that would never be able to be permitted here in the United States so we have a method that will be permittable and it looks like it could be a very economic. On the master alloy side where you blend a 2 to 4% scandium content into aluminum that is the most heavily used amount of scandium in the world today, we actually purchased the assets and intellectual property from a company out of Massachusetts in December of last year that is able to take scandium oxide and converted into the Scandium aluminum master alloy. We think that they can probably get upwards of 10% scandium into that master alloy, which is as exciting as well because of all the advantages that that provides, but we are we have customers for Sc-Al master alloy today that want us to be able to produce this and our limiting factor right now is trying to buy the scandium because China will not sell us scandium anymore. We used to buy our scandium from China. There’s something about announcing our partnership with Lockheed Martin where we’re now shut off and we can’t buy scandium from China anymore, so we’re finding it in other small qualities around the world and we’ve got companies that want to start, including Lockheed Martin, that want to use that scandium master alloy to make the ultimate alloy and to use it in their in end-use products so there are markets for this today and as soon as we can feed them, we’re gonna have a nice little business there we think in the very near future.

Bill-I wanna see if there’s any questions before you wrap up. Ok, um, you talked a bit about the finances getting close to the finish line. Yep. Or starting line depending on how you look at it or your point of view…um your construction timeline you pointed to..do you anticipate the company focused on that single project, or, are there other growth opportunities you are looking at, or perhaps vertical integration,  

Mark-Yeah, we are already demonstrating on the Scandium side, our desire to vertically integrate where it makes sense, but not just for the sake of vertical integration…but where the supply chain has gaps in it, we have lots of experience particularly in the rare earth space, making the rare earth metals, and making the rare earth permanent magnet alloys, where we can add value to the supply chain, we are very happy to do that, but we’re not going to just do it for the sake of doing it, so I do see scandium metal and Scandium master alloy. I see the actual scandium alloys that are used in in the world being part of our vertical integration. I can see us on the rare earth side going as far as metal because that is something that doesn’t occur at a very good scale today in the United States and if we need to do that, we can do that. So where we can, we will and Bill I’ve been around the block a couple of times with a different companies and in different acquisitions and what-not here and there I don’t like to sit still for very long, so we will not stop looking for good opportunities. I’ll leave it at that.

Bill-We are almost out of time any last thoughts for investors today?

Mark-The big one, these products are absolutely necessary in the United States today and four of them you can’t even buy outside of China today, so this is truly a critical strategic project for the country. We have the resources here, we have the capabilities of producing these products and becoming more self-sufficient. I don’t know that we’ll become 100% self-sufficient here, but every little bit helps when we’re in the geopolitical environment that we are in today, so we’re proud to be doing what we’re doing and we’re awfully anxious to get started.