Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video 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.
@Petejh - I did my own calculations based on the Hannam table a while back. I came to smaller figures than you using the actual amounts indicated than will be produced during the lifetime of the mine. I've taken the Au & Cu figures and multiplied them by the years at each production level - shown in my Excel table attached.
https://ibb.co/fXPvbqv
I get just over 15Moz of gold and 639,000 tonnes of copper.
Hannam's have put the following caveat in their research note -
"While we acknowledge this projection is subject to a high degree of uncertainty, we believe Newcrest’s ongoing aggressive drilling campaign over the coming years should begin to deliver the scale of resource upgrades required to support the economics of a block cave operation."
GLA - Paddy
Zoros my point isn't the valuation per se it's the size of the resource on which that valuation is based. 21.1m ozs, plus 9 million tons copper. That's a very big number to put it mildy.
Yes of course Hydro, whatever you say..!
Hey everyone Hydro thinks I'm employed by Stephen Beetham as some kind of share price manipulator, employed to move the price up or down by me using my amazing powers of communication to sway you all, in order to allow him to buy in lower. It's ironic, seeing as how dire my communication skills probably are in real life :))
I'll leave it up to you to make up your own minds on how realistic that actually is.
In the meantime, I've been in GGP with 3m shares since 1.5p in 2018, sold a bunch in the high 20s on the drop following Scally, and happily topped up at 18.5 and 18.7 because I thought GGP was undervalued. But ,in crazy-world, it seems that's proof that I'm an enemy of the cause.
Glad to see you’ve come around, Pete.
Go on - give us all the in ground buy out value (Regis) based on these calculations ;)
AISC for cadia (latest) is minus $6/oz. First time in their calcs it has become a minus. I can't see that happening @ Hav.....unless PoG/C rockets.
I would expect an AISC@Hav: $600-800/oz.
Z
Thanks Pete - it makes a refreshing change to be able to thank the research done from someone other than Paddy, Bamps, Magic, Hydro etc - well done and thanks it’s put another big smile on top of my already huge grin!!! I am grateful to all researchers and selfless posters on this Board it’s what makes this Board so special and why the neg-heads and disrupters are so easy to spot. Come on Greatland!!!
Petejh - Apologies if I have the wrong end of the stick here, but I cannot find the latest Hannam note you refer to. However, their Note from 26th Feb 2021 shows exactly the same calcs as yours???
This results in their (latest?) estimate of 30p for the SP. It is relatively 'old news' now.
Your $1.3Bn (hannam) estimate for the 30% owned slice of Hav is shown in the 26/2/21 note.
Is this your "latest reference"?
Z
Go Team HYDRO :-)))))
Its a bit of a stretch to say they're 'underestimating' when they're already officially estimating 21.1 million ounces in the public domain!!
The resource will grow, we both know that. 65,000m of growth drilling this year, more next year no doubt, and beyond.
Again, my point if I'm not making myself clear enough is that at this stage in the game, early exploration in the big picture, H&P are already publicly estimating 21.1 million ounces. And that hadn't been really been picked up by anyone here or on telegram and talked about. Berenberg talking about 12m ozs was hard enough for some to get their heads around valuation-wise.
Good research Pete . Much appreciated and it isn't finished yet as you say, still more drilling to do !
At the end of the day, attaching value to Juri, Scally is pointless until the drillbit finds decent mineralisation and GGP is a gold explorer.... Lots of pointers and disappointments no doubt. All we have is Hav until proved otherwise.... ATB.
Answering my own question, they came up with 30.1p.
https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/942439/hannam--partners-raises-price-target-for-greatland-gold-to-301p-942439.html
Also, it isn't 'ramptastic' to point out the simple mathematic calculation behind the black and white figures used in the broker note. It's actually the opposite of ramping, it's just pointing out the logic used by H&P.
Ramptastic would be to say we're going to 60p based on no logic.
This estimate is just for Havieron? Does not include Juri and Scallywag? It seems Scally wag is very similar to Havieron.
I've been saying for months (since before xmas) that Hav is likely 15m ozs+. And express that I'd not be at all surprised to see it grow beyond 20m ozs. What I'm pointing out here, for the hard of thinking, is that it's one thing for me, Bamps, you or others on a BB to make estimates of ozs. It's another thing for the analysts to put their name to such a massive estimate in a broker update. No offence to Bamps or anyone else, but our words don't carry much weight.
I'd meant to go through the H&P note as soon as it was released but instead got sidetracked with other investments and life. I've literally yesterday only gone through their assumptions. I'm pretty surprised nobody else appears to have joined the dots.
So.. what exactly is your point?
The estimate clearly states 9 million tons of copper, they (or I) haven't 'left out the copper'. Add it to the 21.1 million ounces of gold.
The point being, it's a MASSIVE estimate. Which nobody has picked up on until now.
They've doubled the vertical extent of the suplhides zone in their assumptions, it says so on page 4 of the update.
My calcs
Calculations with the Eastern Breccias
and also 1200m but not the northern extension
I think I've been very careful/conservative with my assumptions:-
"I've gridded the plan and fairly accurately I believe the area = 176,000 sq m after deduction for the dyke.
I've split the depth into 2 sections
900m deep for the 650x375 section
300m deep for the 800x500 section
2.75 breccias specific gravity
0.75g/t average breccias grade
Top 900m
900x 176,000 x 2.75x 0.75 divided 31.1=10.665m oz
Bottom 300m
300x 314,255 x 2.75 x 0.75 = 6.25m oz
Total = 16.9m oz
I've worked out the gold recovery rate is about 89% average of the breccias and sulphides
Therefore the quantities are around 15.3m oz.
The 2.75 is conservatively on the low side
the 0.75g/t may increase.
It's all about the average grade but from what I'm seeing 1g/t or less is realistic "
From these calculations I've not taken into account for the High grade zone allowing this to compensate for any waste rock.
I've used 0.75g/t to allow for the shell cut off levels.
Conclusion
@0.75g/t = 15.3m oz (most likely)
@1g/t = 23.5m oz
plus 11m gold equivalent ounces
plus any cobalt gold equivalent maybe 3m oz
Hannams getting close to my calculations but they either haven't taken out the Dyke or added the sulphides volume twice
Could you remind me please, did Hannam come up with a target SP in that note?
My reading of it is that Greatland are potentially massively undervalued in a buy-out per ounce scenario; or if they go into production it's a very long road to big money.
Another take-away is how huge of a statement it is for the broker to be quietly saying in their estimate that Havieron is the largest gold/copper discovery in decades. It's one thing for us to say it, I've been saying for a while I think 15m+ ozs (and 20m+ quite possible/likely). But our words don't carry any weight in the market. This is Roger Bell saying 21 million ounces - 'one of the foremost mineral research analysts in London'.
That should mean 93p then.
:)
Would my reading of that be that we are fair value then right now allow for a small bit of risk
Yep, it's here, but you require to register:
https://www.hannam.partners/insights/research/research-articles/adding-a-block-cave-to-our-valuation-scenario-increases-target-price-to-301-gbp/
pete - can you post a link to or a version of Hannam's updated note?
ATB