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.
Hopefully he's not planning on using the Forest new player numbers in last summer as his benchmark for the drill 'oles numbers he feels he needs down the Bush(ranger) this time round to crack the Ascot etc code :-)
For someone who was reticent about using twitter as a way of comms, CB seems to have taken to it now.
He's now doing what many do and sharing his views on matters not just related to his core activity. Now its about Notts Forest !
I wonder if this is the part of his new tactic - deny and deflect :)
Next AGM: Forget xtract SP - did you see the football last week ?? :)
Surprised price hasn't dropped 10% today with those trades, huge £6 sell but only a £5 buy.
Wonder if we might get a rise next week, the drop doesn't seem to be getting the MM any business.
Lowest daily volume in a long time......
Not often get to lunch time with zero trades. Lets hope for some positive news next week and a few up days...
HZ
>>These techniques are designed to give economic advantage, to primarily drive down energy consumption per ton of ore with smaller plant and to save on water and chemical usage.
The cutoff grade is the grade at which the cost of mining and processing the ore is equal to the desired selling price of the commodity extracted from the ore.
So basically, the extra recoverable copper ‘is’ a result of a lower cut off grade due to the increased economics which lowers the cost to process the ore and not necessarily directly from any advantages that a higher head grade has making extraction more efficient. Duh!
The lower the grade the higher the cost to extract the minerals.
So, it’s not the technology that allows recovery at lower cut off but the increased economic benefit it produces ‘allowing’ the economic extraction of the lower or marginal grade ore without displacing any of the higher grade, which in itself is a resulting benefit that the technology improves with better mill feed.
Hi Howezap
Yes add back, the initial conceptual model Revenue would have been after the recovery factor, so my logic was to apply 90% to this amount to reduce it for ore concentrating and then add a little back for a better recovery factor (taking the 87% from yesterdays RNS as the starting point). I’m making very high level assumptions which might prove to be pie in the sky but it certainly demonstrates the potential impact on the economics if this ore concentration works how I understand it.
Cheers
James
less than 50k total trades today... lowest for some time I believe ?
I won't tempt fate and say "at least the selling has stopped" :)
Thank you James for the number crunching on the 71mt study.
>>We lose some of the metals due to concentrator but gain a little in the recovery process which is my understanding of how this works)
Yes I agree James, but on the understanding I hope you meant, “but gain a little back, in the recovery process.”
A cleaner crush, although supporting more efficiency from the processing, surely could not then make up for its initial losses from the bulk ore sorting in terms of end copper content?
The 10-15% losses from ore sorting would need to be returned and further gains from the processing losses would need to be made too, All from the increased efficiency of the processing stage to retrieve more copper including lower grades that would upgrade the JORC as CB implied at the end of the podcast with the roasties.
These techniques are designed to give economic advantage, to primarily drive down energy consumption per ton of ore with smaller plant and to save on water and chemical usage.
It’s a really interesting subject and one that I hope I am wrong and Colin is not just being Colin again!
What are others understanding?
Mattyshy. In a word yes. There is a lot of platinum ounces but they are deep and at current platinum prices uneconomic. In fairness to Colin, no-one could have forseen dieselgate. But like BR, a painful experience which this time around l had hoped to avoid .......
The very obvious mechanism of showing serious - and bottom line - progress here is Fairbride ' Ard rock revenue.. it should already be increasing punchily month on month for a few months now.. and should be within a few months of getting to approx 250k + gbp nett to xtr revenue .. and that - and maybe more on top of that - be sustainable for years therafter.. that would be very meaningful progress indeed for a company the size of xtr !
( the fact that revenue will likely be spent for many months to come on Bushranger is what it is, but, in the round, still makes sense to me.. and spending all of it - nett of xtr salaries/admin etc - might well be to the extent of max. 2m gbp over the remaining 10 months ish of 2022.. which is enough, frankly, for a company the size of xtr to be spending on Bushranger, especially that on top of 8m gbp ish ? already spent there )
LW
Possibly, but even if all the FB income was "wasted" then the Manica valuation (and MC) should be still at the agreed sale price of $17.5M - which is more than current MC
I'm not sure that a lot would think its 100% certain that any FB money would definitely be wasted on Bushranger. I would be surprised if CB did that knowing he was throwing money away just to pretend all is well. He would know the true situation so may well choose to spend FB income on Bushranger.
I think often in AIM the MC become detached from reality and the fundamentals (too high or too low) and this is probably whats happening here.
There is also now the requirement from most SH (I think) that they will now want to see the results and not believe anything CB says now. So maybe when FB income is declared IN AN RNS sp will respond.
CBs "interviews" are now just noise to most shareholders and that PR trick has been played out by CB and found out by SH's.
A4444... the anomaly could be due to the sentiment that the Manica revenue could be poured into something that ultimately still would not deliver for shareholders. The SP could possibly even be higher if BR was put in the same drawer as Kalengwa and Eureka. The feeling is that BR will be a drain on funds not returning anything ?
Ma, the podcast does not mention any cash raise. It does mention further drilling which I always thought was a good idea as I didn't want to pass on undiscovered resources to a third party - even if those resources are only known to a low level of confidence. So, the drilling needs to be paid for. My hope is that African gold will cover it but my next best option is a loan financed by the African income and then lastly dilution via a raise. At these sp prices it could be a substantial number of shares to enter the market. Hopefully we can avoid that.
Your positivity is (on occasion) to be admired, despite it being founded on naivety and crackpot ideas.
Tell me this: What does CB have to do to provide some sort of shareholder value?
What news does he need to release to increase the market cap here?
Is he underperforming currently in terms of his PR of this company?
It seems, the chirpier you are about this being a dead-cert winner, the more the sp falls. You note that it's OK if it falls to 1p so you can buy more. BUT that means the market trusts Colin EVEN less to deliver. Therefore I refer you to my questions above. He HAS to deliver something to turn this around. Currently there is NO evidence he is able to and there is NO plan that he has published that suggests a turnaround in fortunes and therefore an increase in sp.
CB, if you are reading this, something needs to change. The sp is declining. The market doesn't believe we will progress here. Can you outsource Comms? Can you do another webinar? Can you provide a clear plan of action with associated timelines?
Re discussion concerning current very low MC, we paid $12.5m for manica and had offer of $17.5m a year later.
That offer is now less than the current MC ! And thats with zero value for Bushranger and not giving additional value for FB mine completion and in production ! And ignoring the small hard rock income
So even if Bushranger is written off, the current valuation is an anomaly imho.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/disposal-of-manica-gold-project-for-us175m-e2l0lbeow2nube4.html
It makes sense to me to do at least one stage further 'complete' the process on Bushranger definition Maddogpete.. but perhaps only to the extent of max 2m gbp more spend on it.. but, as you say, the extent of any bull commodities market to come and/or the results of this next phase drilling will further clarify thinking on next actions re bushranger, later in 2023 or in 2024.
PS: The extent of grow out of revenue from fairbride 'ard - nett to xtract - in the coming months is a s/p key driver now imho... CB should be giving colour on that in April .. he may not of course .. because he does what he feels like whenever .. which generally plays out to be, at best, bang average information flow managment on his part, alas..
NtM. It makes sense to complete the process to get AA out of the way. But does that mean shareholders will attach any value to BR at the end of that process. And should they ?. As CEO of JLP, Colin took the Tjate platinum project to jorc. 60 million ounces of platinum waiting to be mined. The project remains on the books years later but currently offers shareholders no value. Both projects require a bull market in commodities which we currently aren't seeing. Just my thoughts and would like to be wrong.
Hi LittleWing
if you focus on the conceptual mining study from 2021, what we know is that case 10 generated the following (all in AUD);
Revenue: 6,627
Capex: 1,454
Opex: 4,152
BTCF: 1,021
If we then apply some super simple assumptions to this, these are finger in the air to give an indication of impact
Revenue: Assume 90% (We lose some of the metals due to concentrator but gain a little in the recovery process which is my understanding of how this works)
Capex: Assume 85% (I am making this up, assuming everything is smaller but offset by cost of concentrator)
Opex: Assume 75% (I am assuming 50% of the opex relates to processing and this cost is cut in half)
This generates the following
Rev: 5,964
Capex: 1,236
Opex: 3,114
BTCF: 1,614
These numbers and assumptions will obviously be drastically wrong and don't consider any of the new material from drilling campaign but give an indication about the potential upside from this pre-concentrator. *** packet calcualtion on this increased BTCF would be that it adds 400-500m AUD to the NPV8.
I am a bit more optimistic about BR than I was last week and looking forward to the conceptual economics being released baking in the pre-concentrator and hoping for a breakeven price sub $4/lb
Cheers
James
The least I value Africa Gold assets at is 15 to 20 m gbp.
(While Fairbride Gold output grow out has likely seen a slow start, there remains a good chance that we'll get to 250k gbp + revenue nett to xtr a month from Mozambique Gold at or before mid this year.... and similar for at least 5 years to come thereafter..hence my 15 - 20m gbp valuation)
So, with market cap of xtr currently at 13m gbp ish, I see the market currently valuing Bushranger at approx minus 5m ish gbp ie that much more will be spent on it and it will be worth zero after that.
Further so, including say, all in, 8m ish gbp ? spent already on Bushranger, making 13m ish gbp spend in total, for zero sell on value .
Generally, it remains very hard for me to see this as fair or reasonable. But the market share price is the benchmark we all play the game against, and it is what it is.,whenever
(Again, I'm confident the least the sell on value for Bushranger will be is 10 to 15m gbp - the most I see its sell on value, in due course, would be 100m gbp btw - so I do not think that under 2.5p is a fair or reasonable share price here)
My suspicions are not just due to his BR guidance over the 2/3 years but also the other instances which have been well discussed on here.
steve... yes I used the wrong term. I agree it doesn't confirm anything but just increases my suspicions that he is intentionally misguiding.
"His inability to give meaningful guidance confirms my conclusion that his guidance is intentionally vague so he doesn't have to be seen as having failed his shareholders."
LittleWing - It does not 'confirm' you conclusion at at all. His inability to give meaningful guidance could be deliberate (as you suspect) or it could just be what was stated in the RNS i.e. they haven't finished the modelling due to the decision to test whether a cheaper processing technique would work.
"It has to be viewed as part of an NPV calculation to be any use to us"
I was just trying to get a feel for if we actually have anything that will deliver something for shareholders at BR. I was hoping that the promised study on what we have so far would be showing that the project is a viable sell on. Colin has avoided giving us that confidence. OK I get that we cant know the exact costs unless all the pieces are in place but no project ever has that. Is it viable to sell on or not and what sort of return are we looking at ? Colin avoiding giving anything helpful to shareholders over what he knows is important to us is poor. His inability to give meaningful guidance confirms my conclusion that his guidance is intentionally vague so he doesn't have to be seen as having failed his shareholders.
Unless he can show that BR is still a viable sell on that will benefit shareholders with ALL costs considered, then it looks like it is not. Why would he avoid giving good news ? My head probably knows even though my heart still looks for ways of explaining his misguidance.
Also I would argue, copper prices in 20 years could be 15/20 dollars a LB.