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.
If that is your attitude, that you can't even rely to some extent on a grown-up conversation in the (I have to regretfully admit, completely sober) environment of a small AGM with the board of directors, who do you trust to get your information from? If you don't believe a word of what you hear you should not be investing at all, surely?
As I said a few days ago I am currently in contact with a friend's son who is doing a PHd in porphyries to try and unpack the logic behind what seem like high grades used when doing the met work - as reported in the last RNS. Although there have been no 'light bulb' moments I think I'm coming around to the idea that the met results would be consistent for both high and low grade samples but that using high grades give clearer results. Also, as I mentioned previously, maybe the lion's share of the copper will come from the higher grade areas of the pit and therefore it is acceptable to use these for the met work.
If anything new turns up I will let you guys know.
Cygnus.
JS I'll attend. Was away with work for last AGM but I attended the investor conference shortly before the AGM and the chance to talk directly with Colin in a smaller group was very valuable.
I'm glad we have the final slot of the day
The 88 Energy mugs used to go to the pub with their BOD and got absolutely rinsed. You've got to take it all with a pinch of salt.
As an investor there is a huge value to speaking directly to the BOD when for most of the year there is only the guesswork of bulletin board posters, albeit on a range from well respected to infuriatingly obtuse, to inform one's opinion.
I would prefer that the company did not embark on a hyped up media campaign. That lays out all sorts of claims and targets for naysayers to seize on and try to create mischief with. So in general counter productive.
And there is the problem... the frank insights have no value to the market.
There were around 30 people in the room. Its a really good opportunity to speak directly to Colin and the other board members present. My takeaway was that he is either a very good actor, or he speaks from the heart and feels he is saying it how it is. You certainly get a little more frank insight during the Q&A tahan you do form a formal communication such as an RNS. Sadly I cannot attend this year.
How many on here planning on attending the AGM, and if any were there last year, how was the turnout, how many people approx?
It will be interesting if they announce anything before the AGM. There will be some hard questions asked going by what people on here have stated. Without updating the market in advance what can Colin say ?. We know it is significantly bigger than when they first started drilling but after that ............... ?.
BHP are confident the price of copper will increase in 2025. It is hard to see how selling BR at current copper prices is maximising shareholder value, something he has also promised. (I know they use long term prices, none of which are above $5lb).
When you think about valuations of companies you need to consider the overall market conditions, which are quite negative right now, and the way small cap companies get valued and re-valued very quickly. XTR doesn't have any debt and doesn't need to raise funds in the next 12 months - how many AIM companies can say that? I for one believe that XTR's market cap should be much higher than £30M based on the African assets alone. Anything added from the Australian assets is an added bonus (which could be a very big bonus).
Often I see repeated comments that Colin has said this and Colin has said that about “not the death of a thousand lashes” or about missing his targets, or he said they were only going to drill a few holes into Ascot. yes, I have used many of his quotes and have been readily willing to believe them but my understanding now has allowed me to dismiss them as just attempts to rally the market.
I find it quite amusing that folk so readily and willingly, want to believe those particular comments but then choose to totally dismiss the repeated comments from Colin and also from the highly respected management team about the genuine overall resource potential and that Racecourse will be up around the 2mt mark, and with Ascot, the 2mt will be “by far the bottom end”.
Ok to be fair, I think the swing to the south was ‘maybe’ closed off earlier than they had hoped, with talk that with the potential of extending would see clear 2mt, but they appear confident more recently they are close anyway.
The mid December Ascot discovery webinar, also showed the clear potential of the new discovery, with Jeremy Reid saying we need to drill a load more holes into it to understand it, incidentally this was before Colin even mentioned the initial targets to talk to AA by April/may, with maybe getting away with just 3 holes into Ascot to say ,”there you go gents there’s your other porphyry”
The Ascot discovery webinar was clearly a stronger lead in understanding what they were already planning to do at Ascot and the fact they went to the trouble of producing the webinar, to then only suggest sticking a few holes in it doesn’t make any sense. So Colin was just doing Colin in his own unique way in telling the market what it probably wanted to hear to stir up some excitement.
It was also made very clear in the ascot webinar back then, that they were unable, through regulatory and other reasons, why they cannot provide the market with a running total, and only when the updated resource model for Racecourse is released will that total be reported, as opposed to the opinions here of holding back bad results because that’s what he tends to do!
My theory from all this, and so much more that is there if one takes the time to look or listen, all points to and supports the belief that the extended drilling in phase 2 was to realise the potential of another ‘Cadia like’ system as opposed to just chasing more copper because of a shortfall in their expectations and why they have shut up shop in reporting to hold off ‘perceived’ bad news.
There is a big difference.
I would prefer "keen to acquire XTR"
Hi Johnswan I do understand where you are coming from and the bottom line is , as long as the resource is fit for purpose to trigger one or both of the buy back mechanisms that is why we are mostly all here and ultimately all that matters.
However, consider this, there are lots of factors to consider when valuing a copper deposit, the upshot is that a world-class copper deposit holds a copper resource whose value far exceeds the cost of mining and processing it. This continued fixation that grades have not been up to expectations is complete rubbish. They have been consistent in the lower grades with large runs of it, that have nearly all been of economic grade or above. Exactly what majors want, consistency over 20+ years. Racecourse is looking to be in excess of a 400mt ore body, of which is mostly shallow to surface. That fact, that it is open pittable is the most significant factor in this, it’s by far the cheapest method of mining. Also, with it being in such a favourable location both politically, geographically and probably even more important, environmentally. You have only got to look at Pebble in the pristine Alaskan tundra, couldn’t be in a more environmentally sensitive region which is why it will never be a mine! Bushranger is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum where there is a social acceptance and genuine political support for these types of mine in a mining nation with other open pit mines on its doorstep. Which makes the project highly likely it will be sold and go on to be mined.
A high grade at a low depth can have far less value than a mediocre grade consistent through a shallower resource.
It’s that simple in general, and with a big step up in resource tonnage the copper tonnage will follow, and with it a financial evaluation that will no doubt show a huge improvement in profitability from the already NPV positive study on the far smaller original 71mt resource.
"keen to acquire the OZ assets."
missed that last bit
John
Your view could be correct.
Its the alternative reason why things have been delayed and why we are doing more drilling. Opposite view to " not giving away another cadia etc"
That said, even if things are not as good as CB has implied (of course they may be), then I still believe additional value has been achieved for RC and Ascot. So it may not the 20p+ buy-out CB implied, but enough to see the sp substantially higher than current levels.
So, if final outcome is very bad (against CB's implications) the sp more than doubles and if final outcome is very good sp multi bags.
Well, that's how I see things. Others may well disagree :)
ORIGINALLY POSTED BY ORTHERNCOPPER ON SOLG
BHP’s takeover target, OZ Minerals, says “incredible synergies” could be created in the South Australian copper fields if industry participants shifted their “mindset” over how they work together.
In his first public speech since rejecting BHP’s $8.3 billion takeover bid, OZ Minerals managing director Andrew Cole said his company could more than double its copper production from its existing growth options and expressed confidence that he could find a way to fund the company’s growth projects.
Mr Cole’s speech in Port Pirie came as BHP has warned that copper demand would “take off” after 2025 and would potentially require $US250 billion of spending on new mines to satisfy demand.
“In working together, there could be opportunities in leveraging our approach to local consumables, local manufacturing, local processing and smelting with our concentrate being sent globally.
“Stranded ore bodies in proximity to our assets could be processed at our sites.
“The power line that we use to supply our Prominent Hill and Carrapateena mines has significant additional capacity for other new connections to the grid.
“Far more is possible if we can shift our mindset around how we work together.”
It was unclear what exactly Mr Cole meant by “shift our mindset”, but it is known that OZ and BHP had recently negotiated a possible deal for BHP to buy a portion of OZ’s copper concentrate and share other infrastructure in the Gawler Craton.
The deal was never struck and BHP’s responded with its August 5 takeover bid, which the OZ board rejected without offering due diligence.
“Instead of just developing a single asset, we look for copper-rich provinces where initial or existing developments can work as a hub for wider extraction opportunities,” said Mr Cole.
OZ wants to triple underground mining rates at its Carrapateena mine in South Australia eventually, has several small early-stage project options in Brazil and will soon decide when to start construction on a nickel and copper mine at West Musgrave in Western Australia, which is expected to cost more than $1 billion.
BHP has pointedly raised doubt over how OZ will manage to fund that suite of growth projects, putting the spectre of a dilutive equity raising into OZ shareholders’ minds and suggesting its huge financial firepower could solve the funding challenge if the $25 per share offer were accepted.
Mr Cole pushed back against that narrative on Wednesday, implying that OZ would not struggle to fund its projects.
“These projects are attracting substantial interest; as I often say to my team, capital is not a constraint for good projects. There is a shortage of great projects, not capital,” he said.
“OZ Minerals has possible growth options to more than double our production.”
Mr Cole’s appearance at the Port Pirie event came as BHP published an extremely bullish projection for future copper demand which helps to explain why it is
I will be at the AGM. The problem is not Ukraine, it is the drill results. How can anybody think, based on the RNS announcements this year so far that the resource is likely bigger, or even as big as what we thought it was going to be 6 months ago? CB has completely stopped talking about an imminent 2MT or decision to mine, whereas previously he couldn't shut up about it. This stuff about not revealing a poker hand too soon is a convenient way of trying to buy time. If the results this year supported further and material increase in resource but the company were keeping quiet then I'd accept that explanation, but when results have not been good it makes it harder to believe. Of course CB is not going to come out saying he's disappointed by the results, so its up to investors to digest the data and form their own view. Anybody who says they have not been disappointed by this years results are only fooling themselves.
JS I fewl sure had situation in Ukraine not occurred we would be in a very differentnplace now, afyer all he keeps saying it is far bigger than any of them ever imagined, I won't be able to attend AGM this year unfortunately, but suspect from what was said last year, this is bigger than they were expecting at that time......
After all Colin did also say, no news is good news....
Howezap, the results did not support his optimism, because he gave impression that he expected us to hit 2MT or decision to mine by around mid-year and said he did not expect that to slip. So why did it slip? IMO it is not because Ascot is so interesting, but mainly because the results achieved were not good enough for us to declare 2MT or decision to mine. I believe his comments were based on assumptions with regards to additional copper at Ascot and the area in between, but neither of these materialised into anything of substance. What has happened is that RC appears to have closed out in all directions sooner than expected and results at Ascot, while interesting, have not helped build substantially on the copper resource. Therefore on to phase 3 to help build the case that what we have (below 2MT but with low average grade and cut off) is economical due to higher certainty over what can be achieved sooner at shallower depths. The plan was never to close out Ascot in all directions, but to leave it open for the buyer, but IMO we are now being forced to prove it up to demonstrate that the whole project is viable (and it may well be). I stand by the view that the additional drilling at Ascot has been underwhelming as it has failed to show much of interest outside of the original discovery hole.
Thanks mate just seems to me am doing a lot of reading here and not finding what am looking for. Then I thought why not just ask. Didn't mean to start a riot. As to the guy that said stupid question I've made a lot of money by just asking. Thanks for all the helpful answers. I will hold on here for a bit. The world going to need a lot of these metals very soon.
John
My "deliberately deceptive" (not mislead) comment was not so much on what CB has said re bushranger, but over the years re many other comments on other projects. The jury is out on bushranger so we can't make judgement yet.
I would be very surprised if many LTH prior to Bushranger, would disagree with that characterisation of some (not all) of the things CB has said in the past.
I would say there are many CEOs who are "deliberately deceptive" sometimes.
The average grade of porphyry copper ores is below 0.4%Cu, with the proportion of ore minerals being less than 2 percent of the total volume of the ore rock.
Why have the drill results failed to support his optimism. You are clueless JS try doing some research
Why would he deliberately mislead? Doesn't seem like he was looking to offload shares, nor was there a placing. Just overly optimistic over what could be achieved imo and the drill results this year failed to support his optimism. I noted he did mention in one interview that a higher SP would help when it came to negotiating a sale price so perhaps he had that in mind, but provided the news is good and they are being transparent with the market over what they have then the SP should reflect accordingly ahead of any negotiation.
Mad how any CEO can "mislead" without recourse...
I think that's a fair summary of the situation Andrew.
I'm packing a 3.6p average so I'm very happy to see how it plays out, little downside for me.