We chatted to IronRidge Resources' CEO Vincent Mascolo who explains why the company has become a lithium explorer. 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 and have access to Premium Chat. 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.
many thanks and much appreciated!!
demark et al:
Firstly, in terms of porphyries, the GRADES at the top are NEVER usually higher grade. The CEO of Solgold [ex-investment mgr] said that grades IMPROVE as they go down. This is general & commonly known.
I mentioned the missing X metres FROM 475m is because that has NOT been detailed in the RNS. However, Mr Bird gave the RANGE of 0. 2 % CU COPPER - 0. 6 % for Hole 1, Racecourse so this means that the WHOLE 705m copper mineralised is COVERED [Hole 1]. As a check, I said that dibs61 recorded the interview of 20.1.21 wherein Mr Bird said, they decided to DRILL 30m BEYOND the end of weak or end of mineralisation. SURPRISE [me], they found 20m @ 0. 5 5 % CU - that INDICATES that it is the lower parts that produced the 0.5-0.6% - logical isnt it OTHERWISE HOW CAN IT COME OUT AS 0.2-0.6% CU COPPER? I have to re-check cos I can see my thread as I am using another one that demark used.
SP Angel*s Partner said in one interview of another co that XRF can or COULD be ACCURATE IF USED CORRECTLY. Mr Bird also said in his 17.12.21 interview that XRF will be done properly.
With Mr Doug Menzies, hired as a PORPHYRY CONSULTANT with specialism in Lachlan Fold, NSW, Australia, I cannot think that he DID NOT CHECK BEFORE THE RNS was released. From most co*s, the GEO named in the RNS would have to CHECK whatever is RNSed relating to geology etc. I am sure Mr Jeremy Read, Ex-Head of Exploration BHP Australia-Africa may also ha.ve taken a look including the PhD Geo earlier hired. I said that Dr Steve Garwin even re-checks LAB assays and found some wrong and it was re-stated. Dr Garwin is a renowned porphyry expert.
SO, IN SHORT - NO CONTRADICTION - I brought it up and posted the 2 statement as above, one the missing m and the overall given by Mr Bird. Logic and experience will tell that the much higher grades at 0.5% -0.6% is MUCH LOWER than the FROM 475m. I JUST WANTED FOLKS TO SEE THAT THE 2 HEADLINE RESULTS WERE NOT THE ONLY ONES.
SO, ALL A MIXTURE OF GRADES. SUFFICE TO SAY I GAVE A LINK TO BODA*S PRESENTATION AND SAID THEY GOT GRADES AS 0.2 % COPPER AND 0.17% COPPER.
THOSE ARE GOING TO BE THE OUTER PROSPECT WHERE THE XTR GEO MODELLING MAP SHOWS BROWNISH GREEN 0.3%,
LIGHT GREEN 0.4%
DARK GREEN 0.5%.
EVIDENCE; NO ONE WILL EVER BE ABLE TO REFUTE THE GEO DATA OF BODA, CADIA - RIDGEWAY. Cadia-Ridgeway is a MINE and those I quoted are from PorterGEO: CADIA MINE - kindly check.
THOSE ARE LACHLAN FOLD, NSW, AUSTRALIA GRADES.
PORPHYRIES ARE B I G T O N N A G E and low/lower grades..
I had to go out and did not realise what a fire-storm this has caused.
News, Tues, 26 Jan 2020 @3:50pm
Why is the share price not moving? As usual, with Solgold - Greatland, it is always NOT deep enough, too deep, grades not good enough etc ie ALWAYS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Fast forward, ALAPALA IS A TIER 1 with some £600m mkt cap [++--] and Greatland £1bn.
Pretty sure I read somewhere it would be weekly updates after drill one results....As everyone knew they we're going to be as good if not better zzzzzz!
>> As far as I remember he has said that he will update on daily basis. Hence I am expecting an RNS later.
I think that was for hole 1. As far as I know he didn't mention daily updates for the subsequent holes - although happy to be proven wrong :)
thanks for taking your time to
...the question was "if"..,
As far as I remember he has said that he will update on daily basis. Hence I am expecting an RNS later.
Someone is picking up the loose stock here! This will tick along nicely over the coming months as it all falls into place
Buy n hold time!
From the long section it looks more like 300m to me before significant mineralisation is expected, so probably the end of the week before it starts to get exciting again- but I suppose we may get lucky...
Quite a while now since pictures of Guy Fawkes rocks covered in gold flecks were posted on the website - about time we got a Manica update?
I think CB is busy with GLR today - but maybe later in the week?
There were bumps in the road along the way for both SOLG and GGP with posters disappointed with this and that and look where they both ended up if investors had just HELD. Thats all you needed to do, hold onto the shares. Many will not do that here and live to regret it.
I don't know why everyone is getting hung up on the copper grades. As per the RNs if I read it correctly...... We likely have a gold mine with additional copper NOT a copper mine with additional gold. That's my view.
Mineralisation continue after 150m. RNS after close?
I mostly agree Gixxer but I think we still have something very large for our MC. It is perhaps a disservice to such a great find but the 'star' factor appeared missing from the RNS for me. The grades were a bit disappointing and domethung seems not quite right we are missing the chunk at the bottom that was quoted as 05-0.6%. Also, a chunk in the middle appears to not be up to much- someone mentioned that CB mentioned that ot looked like we were on the edge of the mineralisation at one point - I have no knowledge of that but I wonder if we could have grazed the edge in the middle section and that caused our lower copper grades. Additionally, the copper grades towards the top appear much less than would have been expected from looking at the historic data. Something doesn't appear to quite add up. I'm still hoping the copper turns out slightly better that it currently appears and I'm hoping for a couple of reasonable areas of gold. This still seems like a great asset even if we don't get the improvements I'm hoping for but some of the glitter would be missing.
>> You could be right Steve. Seemed a bit strange why they were not reported though.
I don't think it was done in a clear way, but it was definitely reported. I am quoting from the RNS:
"The data from the handheld XRF indicates that copper mineralisation occurs over a downhole depth of 905m with copper grades ranging from 0.2 to 0.5% Cu."
Before the listed sections it states: "...copper mineralisation occurs over a downhole width of 905m from 110m downhole depth including:"
So that reads to me that it is at least 0.2% for he whole 900m, except for the sections specifically quoted. Of course, as someone just mentioned, that may rise further after the gold assays.
We shall see CE, ultimately the assay results will tell the true story.
let's hope it's not more of CB 'mistakenly' misleading the market.....
....It sounds to me like the 'missing' 430m are at 0.2%...
You could be right Steve. Seemed a bit strange why they were not reported though.
I just may be an eternal optimist, but my reading of the RNS is that the contribution made by gold to the overall Cu equivalent grade will be more than that of the copper itself.
So if the average copper content is 0.3%-0.4% then I would expect the final Cu equivalent grade to be at least 0.6%-0.8% - but I could be wrong...
It sounds to me like the 'missing' 430m are at 0.2%.
From the RNS: "The data from the handheld XRF indicates that copper mineralisation occurs over a downhole depth of 905m with copper grades ranging from 0.2 to 0.5% Cu."
So that states 905m with at least 0.2%, then the listed items are the sections with 0.3% to 0.5%.
From News earlier today
"From my notes, there is CADIA EAST, CADIA FAR-EAST, BIG & LITTLE CADIA, CADIA HILL & RIDGEWAY. Some of the grades from the above range:
"0.15% Cu COPPER
0.16% Cu COPPER
0.36% Cu COPPER
0.4% Cu COPPER
0.5% Cu COPPER
& 0.56% Cu COPPER"
So the grades are comparable to the huge Cadia mine. But again, don't get hung up on grades. The value of the copper is the market value minus the cost of extraction. High grades doesn't help if it is hard to access, in a difficult jurisdiction without infrastructure. A mine here would have a low AISC, making the grades well above the economic threshold.
my new figure is 761 total metres described out of a total opf 1050 m depth meaning 289 metres at the bottom not graded it looks like to me.
I said last night I wasn’t sure of what to make of the RNS. Grades seemed disappointing against expectations but the higher Gold content was obviously good news. I didn’t think the RNS was bad, but could not see why some many were saying it was ‘fantastic’. It seemed OK to me and the market seems to broadly agree today.
Maybe it was down to unrealistic expectations as some were talking about 0.6% and 0.8%Cu and higher. I never thought that was likely and to be fair to CB I don’t think he implied that (IMHO)
Interesting comment made by NEWS
The XRF copper grades given in the above RNS said 40m from 110m, 148m from 171m and 287m from 474m which DOES NOT = 905m of mineralisation as above, so the lower part is still to come?’
It could be still to come as NEWS says, or the alternative view is they were below the 0.2% cut-off so were not reported?
Hopefully next set of drilling results will lift the SP.
For the record, I still think racecourse will be proven-up to 2Mt eventually and that AA will go for the buy-out and we will therefore get a significant sp rerate.
IMO Amateur hour to let the excitement trick them into releasing XRF supported data, that's nuts. Just await final assays.
Ask any other mgmt team or just see that nobody else is doing that...
Doesn't take away the excitement regarding the discovery, but it does tell something about the team
sorry my calcs on the decribed metres are wrong I think but still think there is a difference
>> You did indeed Steve, as did News. That's not my point though. Why use such 'grandiose' terminology when 'in line with expectations' would have been perfectly adequate.....
Because the results are not in line with expectation. They are well beyond expectation. You seem to be basing your judgement purely on grades, which is not a good idea for porphyry systems. The drill carried on for hundreds of metres beyond the expected finish point, making this a much larger deposit than expected with grades better than comparable mines with 10x the market cap. It is literally the definition of beyond expectation.
If you really don't think this is an amazing discovery by now, then it is time to sell :)
The 100% 1 day rise was orchestrated by CB and those who took part in the placing. Let’s see if they can repeat same move again.
I agree that those %s were not THAT good , but just want to go back to something NEWS said (great posts NEWs btw) about the fact that the documented copper grades do not add up to the total 905 mineralisation.
Is that because a lot of metres didn't exceed the 02% cut off, or , hopefully the case, there are a couple of fundred of metres at the bottom awaiting testing. From what I have understood and read that is where the higher grades are found in these type of pophoryic (?) systems.
Maybe someone has a definitive answer on this? will probably make quite a big difference.
My calc is 475m is described in the RNS leaving 430 metres either awaiting test results or below grade, wonder which one...