Shuka Minerals secures final regulatory approval for Kabwe mine acquisition in Zambia
Shuka Minerals said on Thursday it had received final regulatory approval for the acquisition of Leopard Exploration and Mining (LEM), the Zambian company that owns the Kabwe Zinc Mine, marking a key step in the UK-listed firm's African growth strategy.
Shuka Minerals said on Thursday it had received final regulatory approval for the acquisition of Leopard Exploration and Mining (LEM), the Zambian company that owns the Kabwe Zinc Mine, marking a key step in the UK-listed firm's African growth strategy.
Shuka Minerals is a UK-based exploration and development company focused on mining opportunities across Africa. It has a secondary listing on the JSE.
The approval from Zambia's Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) clears the last regulatory hurdle for the 100% acquisition of LEM, first announced in December 2024.
Shuka said it has also agreed terms for a £1.5 million (R37m) unsecured, non-dilutive funding facility to cover the remaining $1.35 million (R24m) cash consideration owed to LEM's vendors. The facility is subject to final due diligence and the execution of definitive agreements.
Under an amended share purchase agreement, Shuka will issue 28.64 million new ordinary shares to settle the $3m share consideration component of the deal. The shares will be issued at 7.737 pence each - a 10% discount to an agreed reference price of 8.5965p - and will represent 29.99% of the company's enlarged share capital.
In lieu of deferred shares, LEM will receive 2 million warrants exercisable at 12.5p per share, expiring at the end of 2027. The warrant terms are designed to prevent LEM's vendors from exceeding 29.99% of Shuka's total voting rights post-exercise.
Completion of the transaction has now been extended to no later than June 30 to allow finalisation of funding and legal documentation.
'This is a huge milestone and one which the market, shareholders and all stakeholders in Shuka have been waiting for,' CEO Richard Lloyd said. 'We look forward to completing this acquisition and progressing both Kabwe and Rukwa to realise their full potential.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
BEE is at a Crossroads - But Who Benefits from Its Destruction?
BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority, writes the author. Gumede is right to point to the recycling of beneficiaries, the political gatekeeping, and the elite capture of empowerment deals. But he is wrong, dangerously wrong, if his insight is used to argue for scrapping BEE altogether. Let me be clear: BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority. It is a critique we cannot afford to ignore. But neither can we afford to allow this critique to be weaponised by those who have always opposed transformation, to delegitimise the very idea of economic justice in post-apartheid South Africa. The recent critique by Professor William Gumede that over R1 trillion has been 'transferred' under Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) to fewer than 100 politically connected individuals is a sobering wake-up call. It is ironic that the same voices calling BEE 'racist' rarely propose solutions to white economic over-representation. Here are the facts: 8 of the top 10 richest South Africans remain white men. Over 70% of agricultural land remains under white ownership. Access to venture capital, export markets, and finance remains racially skewed. The idea that 'BEE is the biggest scam in post-apartheid SA' dangerously distracts from the real structural crisis: the continued racial and gendered concentration of wealth. Certainly not the millions of unemployed black youth in townships and rural villages. Not the historically disadvantaged communities who still lack access to capital, land, and markets. And not the African, Indian and Coloured women who remain structurally excluded from the mainstream economy. We must ask ourselves: who benefits when BEE is destroyed instead of reformed? Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. The only ones who benefit from the collapse of BEE are those who were never in favour of transformation in the first place the economic oligarchs who would be thrilled to return to a status quo of white dominance wrapped in the language of meritocracy. Despite limitations, BEE is not a failure: Over 6 million black South Africans now hold direct or indirect ownership in companies through broad-based share schemes (e.g. MTN Zakhele, SASOL Inzalo, Phuthuma Nathi at MultiChoice). Black ownership on the JSE has grown from less than 1% in 1994 to an estimated 25–30% today (direct + indirect via funds and B-BBEE schemes). Over 50,000 black-owned SMEs have been supported via enterprise and supplier development obligations. BEE has enabled the creation of black industrialists, catalysed youth training schemes, and expanded procurement access. The BEE scorecard includes ownership, skills development, employment equity, socio-economic development, and procurement. It is a multidimensional framework, not simply elite enrichment. However now that we know better , we must do better. Acknowledge the Failures, But Don't Abandon the Mission As a former Member of Parliament and lifelong activist for social and economic justice, I have seen first-hand how some BEE deals were little more than rent-seeking schemes. Politically connected figures often acted as fronts for white capital, offering legitimacy without empowerment. These are not just moral failings they are strategic betrayals of the people. But the answer is not abandonment. It is reform, accountability, and reorientation toward true broad-based empowerment. We must ask: What models have worked? What does inclusive, community-rooted BEE look like? And how do we ensure that BEE no longer becomes a revolving door for the same elite, but instead a ladder for the many? What Broad-Based Empowerment Really Looks Like The idea of broad-based empowerment is not hypothetical. I have checked ,it actually exists though often drowned out by the noise of scandal. Let us spotlight real, replicable models that show us what is possible. 1. Sasol Inzalo Trust (2011) – R26 Billion Empowerment for the Public One of the largest and most ambitious empowerment transactions in South African history. Over 200,000 South Africans from nurses to pensioners acquired shares in Sasol via the Inzalo Trust. This was not an elite project, but a mass participation vehicle offering dividends, ownership, and dignity. Yes, the deal had flaws (especially when Sasol's share price dropped), but the intent and structure were inclusive. We must learn from and build on this. 2. Absa Employee and CSI Trust (2023) – A New Vision for BEE In 2023, Absa created a model that should become the new gold standard. It allocated 7% of its ownership to: 3% for over 35,000 employees; 4% to a Community Trust focused on healthcare, education, and township upliftment. This is real empowerment linking productivity with ownership, and profit with community reinvestment. 3. PepsiCo / SimbPioneer Foods (2020) – Worker Trust PepsiCo's merger with Pioneer Foods resulted in a R1.66 billion worker trust benefiting over 12,000 employees 90% of whom are black. It wasn't politically brokered. It was structurally designed to include workers at scale. 4. Heineken's 'Bokamoso' Trust (2021) When Heineken acquired Distell, it was required by the Competition Tribunal to create a broad-based employee share scheme. 'Bokamoso' gave 6% equity to workers a model where empowerment was made a regulatory condition of doing business in South Africa. These are not isolated cases. They are models for the future evidence that BEE can work, and work for the people. Why can the JSE Top 100 Listed Companies not follow this and give shares to their workers, their customers and communities they serve? B-BBEE That Serves the Nation, Not the Network For BEE to be legitimate, it must: Stop recycling elites: No individual or consortium should benefit from more than one major BEE deal. Impose sunset clauses: Empowerment credentials must expire after a certain period. Create a National BEE Beneficiary Registry: All deals and beneficiaries must be publicly disclosed and tracked. Mandate community participation: At least 30% of all future equity deals must be routed through community trusts, worker funds, and township co-operatives. Align with the District Development Model: BEE must build local economies not extract value from them. We must turn BEE into a mechanism for building black productive capacity, not just redistributing shares. That means more funding for black industrialists, township-based manufacturing, rural cooperatives, and tech-enabled youth entrepreneurship. A Call to Action: Reclaim Empowerment from the Few, for the Many To comrades, policymakers, business leaders, and community activists: we are at a crossroads. Either we allow the failures of the past to paralyse us or we reclaim the transformative promise of BEE and remake it to serve all who were historically disadvantaged: Black Africans, Coloured South Africans, Indian South Africans, women, youth, people with disabilities, and the rural poor. I call on the ANC to: Codify a new generation of community-based empowerment deals Reject individual-based enrichment without public impact Strengthen the oversight powers of the B-BBEE Commission Incentivise cooperatives, worker-ownership, and community reinvestment We must restore the moral authority of economic redress by placing THE PEOPLE not political patrons at the centre of empowerment. Conclusion: Build, Don't Burn Professor Gumede has done us a service by exposing what went wrong. But let us not allow this moment to be hijacked by reactionaries who wish to dismantle BEE altogether. Let us not abandon the house of transformation because the roof leaked. Instead, let us rebuild it, repair it, and expand it, so that it shelters all South Africans who have for too long lived on the margins. We don't need to scrap BEE. We need to liberate it from the few and make it finally work for the many. That is the real empowerment and economic justice we must fight and struggle for. This opinion piece was first published in ANC Today * Faiez Jacobs is a former MP, Public Policy Strategist and Advocate for Economic Justice ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
The real story behind South Africa's unemployment figures
South Africa's unemployment rate has risen to 32.9%. Image: File SOUTH Africa's unemployment rate is a lightning rod for political debate, economic anxiety, and public frustration. In the wake of Capitec CEO Gerrie Fourie's claim that the 'real' unemployment rate is closer to 10%, far below Statistics South Africa's official 32.9%, the national conversation has reignited. Critics of Statistics South Africa (StatsSA) suggest that the official figures are not just technical measures but political artefacts that erase the economic activity of millions in the informal sector. But does this criticism stand up to scrutiny? The answer is more nuanced than the headlines suggest. Capitec CEO, Gerrie Fourie. Image: Supplied Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Why Would Anyone Overstate Unemployment? Let's start with the most provocative claim: that StatsSA and the government have a motive to overstate unemployment. This accusation defies both political logic and institutional practice. High unemployment is a political liability, not an asset. It invites criticism, undermines investor confidence, and puts government performance under the microscope. If there were any incentive, it would be to understate the problem, not exaggerate it. A trend we see in a number of African countries where the official unemployment rates are so low they defy logic and reality. StatsSA is an independent institution that, while not perfect, has a lot of credibility. Its data is scrutinised by economists, international agencies, and the media. Any manipulation or systematic bias would be quickly exposed by these watchdogs. In reality, the agency's credibility depends on its objectivity and adherence to global standards. Does StatsSA Ignore Informal Work? The Evidence Says No A central argument in the current debate is that StatsSA's methodology 'renders millions invisible' by failing to count informal work. This is simply not true. StatsSA's Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS) is designed to capture all forms of work, including informal jobs, self-employment, and unregistered businesses. The QLFS asks about any activity, formal or informal, that brings in income, whether it's selling vetkoek, running a backyard salon, or hustling as a car guard. If you worked for at least an hour in the reference week, you're counted as employed. Both current and former statisticians-general have clarified that informal work is counted, as required by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards. Recent Stats SA research confirms that the informal sector employs about 19.5% of the workforce, nearly one in five jobs. This includes street vendors, home-based businesses, and unregistered enterprises, all of which sustain households and fuel local economies. Comparing Apples and Oranges: International Context The arguments supporting Fourie's claims point to countries like India, Brazil, and Zimbabwe, where unemployment rates are low despite massive informality, and suggest South Africa is an outlier. But this comparison ignores key differences: Economic Structure: South Africa's informal sector is smaller than in many developing countries, partly due to regulatory and historical factors. In India, almost any economic activity, no matter how marginal, is counted as employment, even if it's not enough to survive on. Definitions Matter: Some countries use looser criteria for employment, counting sporadic or survivalist activity as work. South Africa's approach is more rigorous, aiming to distinguish between meaningful employment and mere survivalism. Policy Hostility: South Africa's informal sector faces regulatory barriers, policing, and licensing bottlenecks that suppress its growth, unlike in countries where informality is the norm and often the only option. Is the Quarterly Unemployment Report Flawed? StatsSA's quarterly unemployment report is not methodologically flawed. There is also no evidence that it is politically manipulated. The agency publishes detailed methodological notes, welcomes peer review, and its data aligns with other indicators of economic hardship, like sluggish GDP growth, high poverty, and social grant dependency. If millions of informal workers were being missed, we'd see glaring inconsistencies elsewhere, which we do not. The QLFS is transparent about its limitations and is constantly evolving. For instance, the latest data shows that while formal sector employment decreased, informal sector employment actually increased by 17,000 in the first quarter of 2025. This demonstrates that informal work is not only counted but also tracked over time. The Real Issue: Structural Barriers, Not Statistical Tricks The real challenge is not statistical invisibility but structural exclusion. South Africa's informal sector is not as robust as in other developing countries. Regulatory barriers, monopolistic competition, and a lack of support mean that informal work is often precarious and low-paid. The country's economic structure is dominated by large corporations, making it hard for micro-enterprises to thrive. Even where state policy recognises informal activity, it rarely dismantles the barriers that prevent informal traders from scaling up. The shift in informal enterprises toward home-based operations and the stagnation of licensing reveal a sector that is surviving under constant threat, not thriving. Hybrid Measurement: A Welcome Innovation, Not a Silver Bullet Calls to supplement survey data with financial transaction records and digital platform data are valid and should be explored. Capitec's own data on township transactions could offer valuable insights. But these are refinements, not fundamental corrections. The current statistics are not a 'mirage'; they are a sober reflection of a society where too many are locked out of meaningful work, formal or informal. Let's Fix the Economy, Not the Messenger It is true that black South Africans face disproportionately high unemployment rates and that the legacy of apartheid continues to shape economic opportunity. But this is not the result of statistical erasure; it is a reflection of structural realities. StatsSA's data exposes these inequalities; it does not create them. Nco Dube a political economist, businessman, and social commentator. Image: Supplied
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
China to remove import tariffs on goods from South Africa and 52 Other African nations
South Africa's largest trading partner China has pledged to eliminate import tariffs on goods from all 53 African nations Image: Presidency South Africa's largest trading partner China has pledged to eliminate import tariffs on goods from all 53 African nations with which it has formal diplomatic ties. The announcement was made during the Ministerial Meeting of Coordinators for the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), held in Changsha earlier this week. According to the official Changsha Declaration, China intends to expand zero-tariff treatment to cover 100 % of tariff lines for African countries. "China is ready to negotiate and sign the agreement and signing the agreement of China-Africa Economic Partnership for Shared Development, expand the zero-tariff treatment for 100 percent tariff lines to all 53 African countries having diplomatic relations with China, or all African countries except Eswatini, to welcome quality products from Africa to the Chinese market. "For the least developed countries in Africa, on top of the zero-tariff treatment for 100 percent tariff lines announced at the 2024 Beijing Summit of FOCAC, China will roll out measures on market access, inspection and quarantine, and customs clearance to boost trade in goods, enhance skills and technical training, and expand the promotion of quality products. The declaration also noted that the "the frequent occurrence of unilateralism, protectionism, and economic bullying has severely hindered economic and social development and improved livelihoods in African countries". Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Last month, US President Donald Trump announced a 10% tariff on all imports to the US, along with additional reciprocal tariffs for several countries, including a 30% tariff on South African goods. However, he later paused these higher tariffs for 90 days for most countries, except China, which faced a 145% tariff. IOL also previously reported that The future of South Africa's trade benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) remains uncertain, as the relationship between South Africa and the US continues to worsen. Wandile sihlobo chief economist of the Agricultural Business Chamber of South Africa (Agbiz), said the move by the Chinese government to lower tariffs would benefit the agricultural sector in the country. "We are yet to receive more details on China's intentions to lower import tariffs for various African countries. What is worth emphasising for now is that, from a South African agricultural perspective, this would be a welcome development," he said. "China has a profound importance in global agriculture. In 2023, China was a leading importer, accounting for 11% of global agricultural imports, with imports valued at US$218 billion,". IOL Business Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel
