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.
Gixxer, Yes, I believe you are correct. There are multiple ore separation techniques that have to be tried multiplied by the different ore samples that were used to find the best average overall solution for the particular ore characteristics at BR. Definitely not a modelling issue - maybe a bit of stats.
Expecting a result in the next week, but I am the gullible type (assuming the results are published).
I believe it's more than just number crunching Jezz. I think there is actual physical testing of the material from the drilling to show what % of the copper can be recovered.
Possible they are also employing more than one separation methodology.
How long can a study such as this one take ?
We already have the drill results, isn't it a matter of inputting the info into a computer programme ?
Surely it's an automated system, not one you input every piece of data manually ?
Asking for a friend........
>> scaremonger and say if it’s not released it must be bad
Apart from the known fact it's the standard MO for Bird HZ
Guys or gals, the pre concentration study is a supporting study there is no certainty whatsoever it will be released separately to the market so to scaremonger and say if it’s not released it must be bad may certainly not be the case. In the interim report it stated “we have initiated a study to determine how effective ore pre-concentration could be at Bushranger and will then feed those results into the final open pit economic modelling.”
I’m not saying they won’t release it………..
So we won't have anymore news on fairbride until half 1 ends plus time to calculate revenue.
Only news we will be getting soon is this pre concentration study, which, if its not here this week or next ...... its likely not as great as colin alluded to.....the lashes continue!!!!
In the last interview Bird, ~April6, said the report was due in 3/4 weeks.
Ofc, what Bird says interviews can not be relied upon....
I would say if it's good news the data will be released quite quickly, if not I imagine there will be another round of 'studies' and a few more months wait.
When was the concentration report due?
Well I am saying 5.. 50 / 50 phone a friend...We need NEWS! AND WE NEED GOOD news.
"copper to 6 million metric tons, worth $53 billion at today’s prices (from 2 million);"
While the scale of investment should spark the interest of investors in commodity producers and refiners, the projections of tight supply and soaring demand for those key metals will sharpen the sense of opportunity further.
The International Energy Agency estimates that sustainable development globally such as that outlined in Biden’s plans will require over 40 times more lithium, around 20 times more cobalt, nickel and graphite, and three times more copper by 2040.
https://theoregongroup.com/energy-transition/climate-legislation/us-metals-demand-set-to-soar-on-bidens-big-bets-on-clean-economy/
0.00%
Gixxer thinking in that post is plenty along the lines I'm thinking here .. and good answer by Howzap imho.. much appreciated to you both ..
To answer Fosters Question, I'd - wildly - guess 1.75 in 10 chance of that
I'm going 3, although perhaps a 4 that it will hit 9 before Nov and then crash back down!
A solid 10 of course.
Hit 7p off the back of 1 drill hole so with a decent economic assessment and clear direction forward with indication or statement that no further placings will land, solid income from Africa including the contribution from Kakuyu.
Why not? Particularly if there is increasing demand for copper through q3 and gold continues to be strong.
3.5p will do ! ;)
3.5 ;)
Need XTR to be in the region of 9.5 to 10p by Nov 23 :)
Chances of this happening on a scale of 1 to 10 are?
Fosters100
>>Or would others be happy with the ALL the Manica proceeds being spent on BR?
A wild guess I would anticipate 4-6m gbp minimum to further optimise and upgrade including the cost of PFS which can be rather expensive. It’s a big ask from Manica alone anyway, considering the ongoing production development plans and further small scale mining operations in the pipeline.
Maybe the 4m+ from warrants was for purpose. Have they expired now? Been two years!
Could see another fund raise instead as have missed out. Should not be seen as a negative but will be dependent on price of any placement.
Could be way off the mark without knowing for sure CB’s plans.
'AA may not find the margins large enough for them'. - Good point LW - Bird has mentioned a few times that AA are very conservative anyway, I can't see them being interested in a project that looks to be 'borderline'.
We now know this project is anyway not teir-1 or indeed world class as previously stated by Bird. Should this project be viable, or close to it, it would be much more suited to a contractor already in the area, someone who could further develop it with minimal outlay. Who knows, with another 5 years and $50e6 in drilling spent on it it might well end up being 3MT+ I personally feel that's not the way forward for a small company like XTR.
Or would others be happy with the ALL the Manica proceeds being spent on BR?
I hope, even if we don't show it's viable at current cu process we can get out from under the foot of AA and sell it to someone who can further develop it. I really do hope Bird is not going to blow a load of Manica cash on BR trying to back-up comments he's made in the past.
My preference would be to see a small yearly divvi, say £2e6, ~30%, of the Manica profits retuned to SH's over the next 5/7 years or so. Still leaves a bit of cash for Bird to blow on his next pet project.
I also sincerely hope we don't see a big increase in salary's for Bird and his mates on the Board. - They're already overpaid, IMO, for part time roles.....
I thought Colin claimed we were in commercial production already, and therefore we were moving to a new reporting period.
It wasn't stated like that in the RNS in April, but he definitely said that going forward it would be possible to report our earnings from Manica as intended as the commissioning one-off expenses were now mostly accounted for.......
It was in an interview instead of RNS so I suppose it could be hyperbole ....
>>XTR's decision to mine only has to be based on economics that work for XTR
Hi LW that’s a point! CB had said previously regarding the 2mt , that the agreement does not state, that it needed to be joined up, it was just a number that was chosen. Didn’t he also say at some point that it doesn’t state any particular mining rate of tpa for the decision to mine. (Or did I dream that bit) So one would assume then that the relative vagueness of the agreement could mean that Xtract would only have to base the decision to mine on the ‘very minimum’ mining development requirement to be economically viable as you say, to trigger that AA option???
The priority has always been to trigger one or both AA options
Notice of AGM should be soon?
Just by incorporating modern BOS into the grinding circuit will have big effect on NPV through smaller plant with associated lower Cap costs and the potential to reduce mining costs considerably by lowering cut off grade and producing higher head grades to the mill.
It will revolutionise the way mines are usually worked, where a ‘one size fits all’ approach with all ore being transferred from the mine face to either the primary crusher or stockpiled on the ROM pad by the plant, where it can be stored, or later be blended for continuity of grade.
With modern BOS technology, as it relies on grade variability to be most effective, the less it is hauled and handled the better. So incorporating the technology into a new mine, the primary crusher and sorter can be located as near to the mining face as possible, reducing the fuel costs associated with hauling all pay and non pay material to the plant. Waste material can be immediately diverted to be sold or used for construction of haul roads. With far less volume of waste and higher head grade, the energy intensive grinding mill can be smaller using less power and reducing water consumption.
The whole circuit can be designed around the technology which can be a game changer for the economics reducing mining costs.
I would think a further production increase of 20% is likely from May as we are now leaving the rainy season which would no doubt hamper production a bit. That gives us circa 2K oz a month and that is the figure I've thought more realistic despite the official claims. It may be a bit more but I doubt it will be anything like the quoted figures. I may be wrong.
At 2k oz a month production I would think our profit AFTER TAX would be circa £400K - assuming POG stays at current level
I suspect due to obvious legacy issues with trust, the SP will not be reflecting any future income from FB until its confirmed in an RNS. When it is, and assuming it will be at that level of production, the sp should be going over 3p imho.
But not until we get those figures in an RNS ! And that may take another 3 to 6 months to get that confirmed
Here is what we have been told so far - it is increasing
Progress but a lot slower than we were told.
Q322 35kg
Q422 79kg
Q123 123kg (preliminary from XTR Q4 RNS) of which 52kg was March from Empress info (1670 Troy Oz).
Its only one part of the picture and we are still awaiting to see what it means in $ based on 23% of operating profit but gold price should be very helpful.
Frustration for me is it has taken a lot longer than we were told in 22 June 2022 RNS "22 June 2022 "As at today's date, Fair Bride production has started with the introduction of low-grade ore to commission all parts of the processing circuit. We expect that by the end of Q3 Fair Bride should be up to full commercial production. "
Naively I assumed he meant Q3 2022 !
Commercial I recall is defined as 70% of full capacity (80-100kg output 42,000 tonnes input per month)