We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
ID78,
Yes, higher detail, higher resource confidence.
I also seem to recall they mentioned many months ago that the 2nd Ball Mill was in Nairobi being refurbished. Appears to be back.
On page 11 of the presentation for 2024 plant 4 heap leach for the year and every year after 9,585oz.
9,585oz / 12months = 799oz per month.
For 2022/23 heap leach 4 predicted to be 4,455oz
6 months X 799oz = 4,794oz
4,794 - 4,455 = 339oz short
So heap leach plant 4 won't be coming online until near middle of January 2023.
So from prior post as Q1'22 grade and throughput ... give 2.5koz/month in Dec-22:
Worst case = Plant 1+2+3 plus only 1x 30kt Plant 4 pad by Dec-22:
> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm x91% recovery x2.5g/t /31.1 = 1,100oz gold/month
> Plant 3 HL = 20ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 590oz gold/month
> Plant 4 HL = 30ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 888oz gold/month ... only get 1 pad commissioned ???
Assume Production= 2,578ozs, POG= $1,800 & AISC= $1,250 so FCF= $550/ounce
So, Free Cashflow (FCF) = 2,578oz x(1,800-1,250) = $1.42m or £1.2m/month
@ID78 I didn't bother trying to back engineer their figures as they seem way too conservative whereas past %recoveries, grades and throughput are fact and can be sensibly cast forward with reasonable confidence.
All they need to hit 2koz/month is to complete balance of Plant 3 HL and 1x 30kt of plant 4 and then just do what they have been doing with everything else in Q1 ... seems nailed on to me!
ATB APR
Just catching up on todays posts.
Again some very detailed posts by APG, thank you. Your numbers are quite different to the latest presentation and I understand where they come from and the reasoning for using them is sound. It shows what I was trying to say- the grade of gold previously mined and the volume of ore they are intending to mine (in the presentation) does not produce the amount of gold in the presentation. Using the grace of gold previously mined will completely smash the gold numbers in the recent presentation.
I was very confused last week when I saw the amount of gold they anticipated producing, the numbers didn’t stack up, even with low recovery factors. One thought, was the HL could, as suggested, take 60days but then the recovery factor should increase.
It all comes back to grade, the amount of gold for the volume of ore just suggests low grades. But this is good for 2 reasons first it helps boost the gold resource if you drop the cut off. Second when we mine higher grade areas then the gold produced will go through the roof (relative to the numbers in that presentation). Everything just feels very conservative and worst case. And so yes it adds to the sentiment that risk is being removed as they progress the project.
One other thing - the gold from plant 2 is so small. Is it even economical (135oz) ? Is something else planned for plant 2 further down the road??
As APG says the main hurdle (provided the MRE comes in as we expect), is that they need to mine so much more ore!
Still digesting some of the posts- Greg, thanks for the posts about the finances.
Itsyou - yes that does look like a second ball mill and do you notice the plot in the slices with the drill holes is more detailed, circular patterns and ore concentrations instead of the rough blocks. It doesn’t do anything to help my predictions, it is just interesting to see what the drill results do to change the model.
Anyway, thanks all for the posts, have a good evening, and here’s hoping we get the MRE next week.
The Block Model picture on P12 of the latest presentation is quite revealing.
The existing Resource is in the centre and they show where drilling has been done to the right(East) and left(west), which will be the ounces being added in the upcoming MRE.
They've sliced the image to the right extension, to show the mineralization at depth for Underground mining.
More of note is the large contiguous blocks of higher grade at surface to the left(eastern extension), which will no doubt be Open Pit.
P.s Their website is undergoing a revamp, with new content, picture & Images. Although the pics/vids aren't visible atm, you can see them, if you know where to look.
Here's one : https://caracalgold.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/5d311b7f-d653-4b2b-b24f-b13729f32d45.mp4
Looks like the second Ball mill behind, on the ground.
Hi Greg, OOSM,
The target 2000 oz pm " Run Rate" has indeed been quoted by the end of this year, and does not contradict Greg's comments about outputs between july and June next year, as RM has already indicated there will be disruption to Production during the Plant development / commissioning and ramp-up. During this time I would expect optimization to occur to all the various processing stages as we aim to get to steady state output conditions and Operating costs. With regards to Fnancing, without having details of anticipated expansion costs it's difficult to predict which route the Company will follow, but my experience with both SHG and THX recently, leads me to believe that our Capex requirements will be relatively small , and well within Paul Reeves capabilities.
Only one, by my own estimation on 31st December 2022 the company would have made a profit from gold sales since it listed of $4.2m and in the same time period the exploration cost at Kilimapesa would be $4.2m.
They had a £5m CLN facility which they changed for a £2m strategic placement.
There must be £3m shortfall in the expansion planning to overcome.
They can't dilute but the obvious thing to look at is that the company has basically zero debt to tap into.
@Greg25
An interesting perspective Greg25, and you may be correct about needing capital investment, but IMO this will not be the case because of two factors:
1. There is the larger plant 3 HL coming on stream, so additional gold will be produced.
2. If capital investment was being used, I would expect an accelerated time table to reach the 2,000ozs/m target.
ATB & GLA
RedRoy, nice post Gold dore production of 15196oz for next 12months until 31st June 2023. You're absolutely right with average 1265oz/month.
But we can go one better, by the end of year it's 2Koz per month production, so 2023 will account for 12Koz leaving 3,196oz for the rest of 2022 which is 533oz average production per month . Roughly $300k per month profit covering Kilimapesa exploration and NOT funding further expansion.
Therefore capital investment is definitely coming to finish the expansion plans.
It won't be dilution of a placement, so it's going to be something quite exciting for shareholders.
Afternoon all,
From the June 22 Presentation - Kilimapesa Production Forecast, I see the following :-
1. Gold Dore production 1/7/22-31/6/23 = 15196 oz ( ave 1265 oz/month)
2. July 2023 onwards run rate of 24000 oz pa ( 2000 oz pm ).
Plant 1 ( Refurb. Mill2 + new Cil 2 circuit commissioned q1 2023 ) - output 590oz pm Dore increasing to 876 oz pm ( July23 onwards ).
3. Plant 2 ( existing Mill/Cil circuit ) decoupled for dedicated Tailings treatment, - output 115 oz pm increasing to 135 oz pm ( July 23 on ).
4. Plant 3 ( Commercial scale HL pad(s) commissioned July2022 ) - output 370 oz pm increasing to 800 oz pm ( July 23 ).
5. Plant 4 ( Trial pads 1-4 commissioned q4 2022 ) - output 190 oz pm increasing to 195 oz pm ( July 23 ).
6. Crushing & Screening Plant to feed all 4 Processing plants commissioned q4 2022.
7. As there is no mention of Target optimized Recovery Rates for each Process plant and very little historic Operating data, or the actual Gold content of the Dore bars, it is not practical at this stage, to forecast future Revenue / cost figures until " Steady State" Operating conditions are achieved . Hopefully, the Quarterly Reporting info. will improve as promised in Q3 in line with traditional sector reporting.
Not saying they will do exactly the same as Shanta Gold but Caracal Gold will be doing something similar after the MRE is how I see things panning out .
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/SHG/new-loan-facility-and-trading-update-7nx27xvndwfof9u.html
The updated MRE will support future production grades for forecasting purposes. Even though production grades are always average as it's variable.
Just looking at Q1 results and the company would have made upto $600k from production and spent upto $900k on exploration. £2m ($2.4m) placement and spent $500k on Nyakafuru.
$3m - $1.4m = $1.6m RM says currently they have $1.75m so they have sold more gold but still have another $1m to pay on Nyakafuru.
Exploration on Kilimapesa $300k per month for 2 rigs.
Exploration on Nyakafuru possibly £300k+ per month
$750k in bank with $600k+ per quarter in profits.
See where it's going? Exploration will be funded from production and expansion will have to come from capital investment.
MRE - Capital Investment - increased production - MRE capital investment - increased production.
@OOSM I will go through the GCAT presentation separately but their website is offline this morning so it will have to wait. My Calculations so far have been "Bottom Up" given RNS data and performance to date so are a reliable place to start for any projections going forward, but of course don't figure in down time.
I suspect that the GCAT presentation figures are very conservative and therefore giving then some wriggle room.
ATBA PR
@aprogerson,
Thank you for sharing your detailed analysis of how you project all the planned gold production targets will be met, and whilst I haven't checked the actual numbers, the calculation methodology is crystal clear thanks.
I realise that all you calculations are based on information extracted from various RNS's, which is completely correct, but as I said, the particular scab, that I'm picking at just stems from those Kilimapesa production projections, which for obvious reasons your calculations does not factor in. So I guess I will just keep scratching my head until a future RNS clarifies the factors hidden beneath Robbie's presentation, but thanks anyway.
ATB & GLA
@ID78 All my calculations assume the Q1 2022 Operations Report grades of Main Plant @2.5g/t and Hl of @1.72 g/t. I try very hard to to speculate too much, but I agree that the indicated grades of surrounding targets do look to be good although processed ROM grades do tend to be low as they blend in lower grade ore.
For me this is all upside as downside risk seem to be diminishing fast especially with Kilimapesa MRE now overdue and Q2'22 Operations report some 4-5 weeks away.
ATB APR
@Greg/ID78 My very long-winded explanation excludes 5-10% profit/ounce once all plant optimised and effect of Plant 1&2 upgrade now put back to Q1/2 2023 ... so assuming I haven't 'dropped a cods' in my numbers and all planned plant has been built and upgraded BUT using Q1,2022 grades then ...
Q1'22 Grades, but optimised & all planned Production by end Q2 2023 (RNS 20-May-22 data):
> Plant 1 & 2 %recovery = 93% ... as 92% to 94% expected
> Plant 3 & 4 %recovery = 60% ... as 55% to 65% expected
> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm x93% recovery x2.5g/t /31.1 = 1,120oz gold/month
> Plant 1b & 2b Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm x93% recovery x2.5g/t /31.1 = 1,120oz gold/month
> Plant 3 HL = 20ktpm x60% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 665oz gold/month
> Plant 4 HL = 120ktpm x60% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 3,990oz gold/month
So assuming GCAT do what they say they are going to do with Plant 1, 2, 3 & 4 build plus upgrades including plant and process flowsheet optimisation then by end Q2 2023.
> Gold Production 6,895oz/month or 83koz/annum
Worst Case POG= $1,800 & AISC= $1,250 ... so no change:
> Revenue = 6,895oz x$1,800 = $12.4m or £10.3m per month which equates to $150m or £123m per annum
> Free cashflow = 6,895oz x($1,800-$1,250) = $3.8m or £3.15m per month which equates to $45.6m or £37.8m per annum
Expected Case POG= $2,300 & AISC= $1,150 ... consensus POG and HL OPEX savings:
> Revenue = 6,895oz x$2,300 = $15.9m or £13.2m per month which equates to $191m or £158m per annum
> Free cashflow = 6,895oz x($2,300-$1,150) = $7.93m or £6.58m per month which equates to $95.2m or £79m per annum
Commentary:
Current MCap= £12.75m so implied Q2'23 P/E worst case= 12.75/37.8 = 0.337 or patently ridiculous for the implied cashflow or half P/E that in Expected Case assuming only current Q1'22 grades are processed! Of course IF mine plan and optimisation allows for higher grades to be processed than achieved in Q1'22 Operations then these numbers get proportionally better and %recoveries may also improve.
I also expect that GCAT have cannibalised the CAPEX they were going to use for Plant 1 & 2 upgrades on building out Plant 4 HL capacity so will continue to use FCF in Q1/2 hence avoiding requirement to come back to shareholders to fund this which would be very good news indeed!
IMHO even in Worst Case scenario with current grades continuing to be processed then a serious rerate is on the cards as this plays out ... even then lots of potential upside from better grades +higher POG and/or improved AISC!
ATB APR
There is one thing I think I’d maybe lost in translation.
The hill is just not high grade when you compare to the potential of the other prospects. Vim-Rutha, Teng Teng, Maghor all suggested to be 12g/t against the hill having an average of 2.44g/t. It is classes low grade in comparison to the regions we have not yet drilled (or just started to drill).
Thanks, APG - I think we are saying the same thing in that plants 1 and 2 will treat the high grade ore once they find it. Currently the pesentation shows plant 2 producing 10% of the gold of plant 1 which is low.
If they start mining higher grade ore areas (higher than the hill) the gold from plants 1 and 2 could easily double. For plant 1 that is 21000oz alone.
I guess they have to base projections on what they know, and they know the hill and have yet to drill much elsewhere.
My long winded point is that again everything seems to be based on worst case (eg lowest gold grades in the licence).
There really is huge upside to the numbers in that presentation.
Morning OOSM My understanding of current plant, throughput, configurations, %recovery (now vs. later) & future plans are based on Prospectus (Aug-21) plus RNS 20-May-22 Q1'22 & Stockbox interview data and will evolve as new capacity brought online with optimised plant, mine and mine plan to follow:
Configuration, costs & %recovery:
> Plant 1 & 2 (in series) High grade Circuit via std CIL = High CAPEX & OPEX
>> %Recovery now = 91% (Q1'22) ... see Explainer below
>> %Recovery when optimised = @92/94% (expect Q2 2023)
> Plant 3 & 4 (in parallel) Low grade bulk Heap Leach = Low CAPEX & lower OPEX
>> %Recovery now = 52.5% (Q1'22)
>> %Recovery when optimised = @55-65% (expect Q4 2022)
Plant 1 & 2 %recovery Explainer (RNS 20-May-22 data):
> Plant 1 Standard Plant = Crusher> Ball Mill> Gravity> CIL = 80% recovery
> Plant 2 Tailings Plant = CIL = 52% recovery
As Plant 1 output feeds Plant 2 input then overall %recovery = 80% + (52%x 20%) = 91% when optimised I expect that this may rise to 92-94% max
Capacity, throughput & availability:
> High grade Ore Circuit via standard CIL Capacity:
>> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm or 180ktpa ... Plant 1 & 2 are in series NOT parallel
>> Plant 1b & 2b Standard & Tailings CIL = +15ktpm or +180ktpa
> Lower Grade Ore via Heap Leach pads Capacity:
>> Plant 3 Small HL = 20ktpm or 140ktpa (4x 5ktpm HL pads)
>> Plant 4 Large HL = 100ktpm or 1,200ktpa (4x 25ktpm HL pads)
Timeline & Capacity by Dec-22: (Upgraded plant 1b & 2b to follow in Q1 2023)
> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm or 180ktpa @91% recovery @2.5g/t
> Plant 3 & 4 HL = 140ktpm or 1,680ktpa (4x 5ktpm +4x 30ktpm HL pads) @53.5% recovery @1.72g/t
Grades & Production by Dec-22 (RNS 20-May-22 data):
> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm x91% recovery x2.5g/t /31.1 = 1,100oz gold/month
> Plant 3 HL = 20ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 590oz gold/month
> Plant 4 HL = 120ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 3,550oz gold/month
Max Revenue & FCF (RNS 20-May-22 data):
Assume Production= 5,240ozs, POG= $1,800 & AISC= $1,250 so FCF= $550/ounce
So, Free Cashflow (FCF) = 5,240oz x(1,800-1,250) = $2.88m or £2.4m/month
Worst case = Plant 1+2+3 plus only 1x 30kt Plant 4 pad by Dec-22:
> Plant 1 & 2 Standard & Tailings CIL = 15ktpm x91% recovery x2.5g/t /31.1 = 1,100oz gold/month
> Plant 3 HL = 20ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 590oz gold/month
> Plant 4 HL = 30ktpm x53.5% recovery x1.72g/t /31.1 = 888oz gold/month ... only get 1 pad commissioned ???
Assume Production= 2,578ozs, POG= $1,800 & AISC= $1,250 so FCF= $550/ounce
So, Free Cashflow (FCF) = 2,578oz x(1,800-1,250) = $1.42m or £1.2m/month
IMHO worst case still comfortably beats 2koz/month by end Dec-22, BUT all assumes can mine the necessary ore! Once main plant upgraded and HL plant optimised then %recoveries and profit w
The end goal is 50Koz once the plants are running at capacity producing 24Koz they'll be looking to double the grades being put through throughout all the plants.
@aprogerson,
Perhaps you can help me out as I am still having difficulty reconciling in my head how the projected 924,000t/a of ore necessary for 24,000ozs of gold/a divides up between plants 1,2,3&4. based upon a maximum of 30,00t/m passing through upgraded plants 1 & 2, the and plant 3 producing approximately 25% of the gold/a that plant 4 does. The only split of the ore tonnage that seems to fit is still what I suggested before:
600,000t/a (or 50,000t/m) through plants 3 & 4
324,000t/a (or 27,000t/m) through plants 1 & 2
Which at the time led me to believe that each pad in plant4 was 10,000t capacity, as was the total capacity for plant 3. Now though I believe that a more plausible scenario is that each pad in plant 4 is actually 20,000t, as is the total capacity of plant 3, but to reconcile this with the 600,000t/a throughput, the answer would have to be that each HL pad will 'run' for the originally proposed 60 day cycle.
Does this in any way fit into your view of the projected plant structure based on Robbie's, 'KILIMAPESA PRODUCTION FORECAST' on page 11?
ATB & GLA
@ID78 Plant 2 is the Tailings plant which uses the output from Plant 1 as its input. I still think of Plant 1 & 2 as a single entity with 15ktpm capacity and an overall 90/92% efficiency with circa 2.5g/t as its input.
My strong suspicion is as HL capacity grows only the very high grade ore will then be routed to Plant1/2 as it seems almost criminal to be routing high grade ore at 50-60% recoveries to HL. Once we hit 24koz/annum the next leg up will be to increase throughput at the main processing Plant 1/2 so we get the full benefits of the high-grade ore at much higher throughput.
ATB APR