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.
Section 10 Risks and opportunities
(a) geological prospectivity and the possibility that further exploration may fail to demonstrate
economic mineralisation (in the case of projects without defined Ore Reserves),
(b) geology of the mineral deposits,
(c) estimation of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves,
(d) operational aspects including the mining/extraction method, dilution and mining
losses, equipment sizing and efficiencies, use of selective mining assumptions, waste
management, meeting regulatory requirements and mine closure,
(e) mineral processing and the variability of metallurgical parameters and wellfield extraction
such as recovery rates, process plant availability and the ability of new processes to be
financed and perform as forecast,
(f) construction, including unforeseen physical conditions or weather or industrial disputes,
which may affect both capital costs and completion date,
(g) provision and adequacy of infrastructure,
(h) commodity price, inflation and exchange rate forecasts,
(i) production of marketable commodities in terms of quality, price and cost of production,
(j) sovereign risk involving social, political, environmental, cultural and security factors that
cannot be controlled by project operators, and
(k) project funding.
A Practitioner should report upon the likelihood of de
Available here for interested parties
https://www.valmin.org/docs/VALMIN_Code_2015_final.pdf
Section 8 is valuation. A few snippets below.
8.1 Basis of Value
"Technical Value is an assessment of a Mineral Asset’s future net economic benefit at the Valuation Date under a set of assumptions
deemed most appropriate by a Practitioner, excluding any premium or discount to account for market considerations. "
"Market Value is the estimated amount (or the cash equivalent of some other consideration) for which the Mineral Asset should
exchange on the date of Valuation between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm’s length transaction after appropriate
marketing where the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently and without compulsion."
"Market Value may be higher or lower than Technical Value. A Public Report should take such factors into account, stating the results
of the principal Valuation Method(s) used and disclosing the amount of and reasons for the difference between the Market Value and
Technical Value."
8.2 Common Valuation Approaches
(a) Market-based, which is based primarily on the notion of substitution. In this Valuation Approach the Mineral Asset
being valued is compared with the transaction value of similar Mineral Assets under similar time and circumstance
on an open market.
(c) Cost-based, which is based on the notion of cost contribution to Value. In this Valuation Approach the costs incurred
on the Mineral Asset are the basis of analysis.
Income based clearly will not apply so I didn't snip that
"A Practitioner must make use of Valuation Methods that are suitable for the Mineral Assets under consideration. Selection of an
appropriate Valuation Method will depend on such factors as the:
(a) nature of the Valuation;
(b) development status of the Mineral Assets; and
(c) extent and reliability of available information."
.4. In Situ Values
"Consistent with the JORC Code, in ground (in situ) values must not be reported in a Public Report."
IMPORTANT - it's useless for us to be assuming a POC and multiplying by an in situ tonnage and factoring down. That won't fly and won't be used and any alignment with a final price is likely to be coincidental
zeromatrix, just this once as never had a problem before on a forum. I work at a primary school and forward looking, think it would be good as William is younger and hopefully have a better, longer lasting relationship with generations to come. He will have more energy and keep the monarch alive in years to come . Attitudes change towards the royals and l for one would like to see it here for many many years. Charles is a well respected man and see what you are saying. We are lucky to still have a royal family and keep history alive so just my opinion. Wish l was in my 20s. Who ever you are have a good life
surely we should be celebrating her life. turning radio off its really depressing me. not every song
This is a BB whose subject is 'how to make money out of a copper mining resource on the other side of the world whose fortunes no-one here can influence or even comprehend the day to day state of play'. That doesn't prevent a feeling of entitlement to comment, criticise, ridicule, support, etc, etc.
But it is not a general discussion about the state of the world, politics, etc.
But I feel I have to reply to Mr gez.
You've clearly met and got to know Prince Charles, Now King Charles III? Your view of him is not simply parroting what you have read in our unbiased, objective media industry? And Prince William ... you know this guy well also. So you can make a value judgement about their relative merits and capabilities. To the extent that your advocation of turning our constitutional process on its head is the right way to proceed?
Out of interest, are you in your 20's? I hope so, for your sake.
I'm not a royalist but what a lovely story...
https://twitter.com/i/status/1567894552744271872
better for the country if Charles moves over and william be king. Young blood and will be more respected. Respect to the family
With our Queen passing, she is now safe in the arms of god
God save the king
At this very sad time,
with respect
Hi flipper there is always that suggestion that AA are not necessarily the ideal buyers so I think waiting for the cat to come after the pigeon is not ideal if they are not interested. Let’s wrap it in a big bow and take the pigeon to the cat. With an outcome one way or another, it sounds as though the early high grade recovery will be increased anyway, and then further drilling dependant on outcome.
I’ve always had concerns that mighty AA will play hardball, if they don’t want it now, they are not likely to just rip up the agreement if there is the chance that their internal politics might change in a few years and so will not want any other majors stepping in to take it on in the meantime. So I think there is a dependency on getting the data package quality right so one, or both of their options is met and triggers the buy back mechanism undisputed.
If they do want it, then at least there is option to go to third party valuation if both valuations are too far apart.
I agree with Steve’s interp too, and others that it’s looking toward a ‘23 sale at some point now.
howezap. Relistening to the GLR podcast which from about 16.01 refers partly to XTR, he states "keeping going, keep adding value......." and from 17.30 "they will be lucky to get copper assets in 2024".
As Steve has previously stated, he might be trying to force an offer out of AA. Also, it is entirely reasonable that AA play hardball for the benefit of their shareholders. But I think what he is saying is probably a fair reflection of current plans. Happy to be corrected. The podcast team did a good job at asking points raised on the bb's.
I'm invested in 3 Colin Bird companies, four if you include the unmitigated disaster that is KEN.
But having made a shedload in JLP, I am definitely starting to feel that the smart money is in now in GLR for a multibagger in the shorter term rather than XTR.
It’s noticeable how Colin seems to bring up the sale of kalumbila frequently and in this podcast he does so again, commenting on what it now produces against what it was sold for. That, “it was the right time for shareholders.”
It’s fairly obvious he feels they under sold it, and now with Bushranger you certainly get the impression he is not going to make the same mistake by not realising the asset potential by “selling and then 6 months down the line it’s announced that another Cadia is found.”
Is justification enough that has seen the completion of an extended exploration phase, with a next phase under consideration. First step, get the modelling out, and see if our buy back partners want it so they can get the constricting agreement out the way.
Have complete faith in Colin to deliver, there’s your experienced businessman right there! He may have his critics, but you would not want many, if any other chairman in control of your hard earned.
I hope we have some news before next Easter, the SP is failing again, I think we will see 3p or less soon.
I'll be having a major top up if that happens though.
He seemed fairly confident that copper will resume its upward trend next year and that the big players will look seriously at what's on offer. I'm hoping that by Easter AA will have made a decision and if it's not to buy, then others, including the Chinese, will enter the bidding arena.
One can only hope!
CB on top form in that podcast ! (absolutely no need for the one and only Mr Colin Bird to remotely consider 'smoking dope'.. as he's already so high on life..)
It was an interesting and informative podcast and yes he was definitely talking about XTR in the latter part. Roll on 2023.
https://audioboom.com/posts/8153958-midweek-takeaway-with-colin-bird-executive-chairman-of-galileo-resources-aim-glr
People can interpret things in their own way. But my feeling was he was referring to XTR and the 2 m/t in the interview and XX being awkward.
Can somebody direct me to this Telegram group please?
ps To save a likely comeback on Amur, I should have also noted that thee broad outline of a potential proposed Amur deal was spoken of by managment ahead of the Russia invasion of Ukraine .. and it was cr+p then too.. more cr+ppy subsequenly granted.. so the eg is still valid imho.. no doubt happy clappers will look to brush that eg under the carpet some other how though. along the lines of if you're not posting good vibes about the stocks you hold a position in then you shouldn't be posting anything.. wihc always makes me think : 'seriously ?' ..and laugh.. not least as AIM is far more about 'in play' betting these days than the longterm buy and hold eg Range Trading
From the Bushranger value aspect of xtr.l - and I also absolutely note we have Manica 'ard too.. which could do with a bit more respect generally here imho- what's really needed to get momentum back is one or more - semi even -similar stocks in this or other commodities exploration AIM LISTED sub sectors to have a 'marquee' - ie strong valuation - buy out event occur ASAP... (Note i'm saying not a Aus/Canada/US /Asia listed etc marquee event, BUT an AIM LISTED one ..I'm in a gold explorer whose AIM Sub sector sector very badly needs that too for eg.. and I was until recently in Amur too.. but what's happening there is, alas, the exact opposite of what's required.. so the one eg I have is a cr+p one.. that further discourages generally etc)
Alas, such marquee deals have been very - very- slow to happen for plenty long time now.. and hence Investors/Punters are more prone again to stay away from such AIM sub sectors as a rule.. until such an inspiring event(s) occurs and they don't stay away any more...
(To save you saying it back.. obviously great if Bushranger this year is that marquee buy out.. but one wherever ASAP would have a much needed good s/p effect generally is my broader point..)
I read somewhere that, “the strip ratio has lost some of it’s importance over the last decade with tools now that allow better modelling and quantifying, a number of the other ratios or strategic indicators.” Also that it is not an absolute factor but just an indicator.
After looking into it further, it is clear that the geology on its own, determines the strip ratio, it is not influenced by the economics or even wether there is a higher quality, or grade of resource. It is however, influenced by the type of waste materials that will need to be removed. So the strip ratio, ultimately influences the economics, not the other way round as is the case for the economic mineable grade cut- off. The strip ratio ultimately determines the open pit slope angle, so in theory an easier to dig overburden will not necessarily be cheaper for the project economics as it may mean the slope angle needs to be increased to have the same structural integrity to prevent land slip. So, although the waste material could be a lot easier to remove, this could well actually increase mining costs overall.
So I it seems fairly clear that the strip ratio is an important factor now as it has always been, toward economic evaluation. Then, the more the project is studied, the other associated costs are added to figure the projects value.
Having said that, is there a correlation with strip ratio and the latest focus on environmental impact and reclamation costs that might actually increase the importance of the strip ratio?
Any other thoughts overall appreciated.
I am not going to go into details as it tends to lead to arguements.
Think of is as owning a piece of art. It can be valued as the price you brought it for, the insurance price, the auction price, the price to a pawnshop, or even the price to a must have collector. If the art work isn't very good, it could just be the cost of the raw materials.
There is always going to be a range - a wide range. My suggestion is to read the valmin code. In reality the lowest price and the highest price are never achieved. Instead it's nearly always somewhere in between. The 5p was the very lowest price.
Iceberg, How does the valuation work?
the share price was in the doldrums throughout last summer as well