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.
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.
I suspect the market may also be taking into account that not everything CB says will happen, does happen.
If we had another CEO who had always delivered against his previous forward guidance then I suspect the sp would be over 10p by now.
If your bet is CB will deliver some value from Bushranger, be it a little or a lot, then just lump on at this sp. If you think its another example of CB being overly optimistic / deliberately deceptive, and he wont realise any value, then sell or don't invest.
The Transaction Incentive Awards and the share options mean the BoD and Xtract staff should be fully motivated to get maximum value for Bushranger.
Clagnuts - It is because the market is at odds with our assessment of the potential value that we are invested here. No profit to be made otherwise!
If the market knew anything (the mass not the individual traders) you wouldn't get so many huge spikes in SP for so many AIM companies. If it's telling us anything about value it's just that they don't think anything will happen this week.
It looks to me that "the market" (whatever that is) doesn't believe the minimum NPV of Bushranger is 7.8p. Looks to me that "the market" is implying a reasonable chance of Bushranger delivering no shareholder value at all. Or at least not in the near-term, anyway.
If AA decline the right to buy, and no other suitors are forthcoming, that would leave XTR with no choice but to write off the project or develop the project itself. Clearly the prospect of that outcome reduces the "minimum" value of 7.8p to something like 1p due to the burden of risk.
Go easy, I'm not trying to pick a fight. Nothing I'd like more than for this to fly.
TDoubleU
I think its the resolution from last AGM you are referring to:
"Transaction Incentive Awards: These will be awarded to Eligible Participants and the Award Triggers will
be based on the Company completing a successful acquisition or disposal transaction (the “Transaction”)
based on criteria determined by the remuneration committee. The maximum award payable in relation to
a transaction will be in the range 1% to 2% of the Transaction value and be allocated amongst the Eligible
Participants by the remuneration committee. Awards may be paid in cash and/or Company shares and if in
Company shares based on the 30-day VWAP following the date the Company announces the Transaction.
Corporate Event: In the event of a takeover or merger, general offer being made to shareholders, scheme
of arrangement, member’s voluntary winding up, change of control or other similar corporate event (a
“Corporate Event”), the Eligible Participant will be deemed to have met their Annual Incentive Award
and/or Award Trigger unless determined otherwise by the Remuneration committee taking into account the
Eligible Participants Annual Trigger and/or Award Trigger"
It is at end of this doc
https://xtractresources.com/wp-content/uploads/Xtract-AGM-Circular-CL_final.pdf
Not a big deal, even at 20p these would be worth £2.4m, I don't think anybody would begrudge them that if we can make that sort of SP.
TDoubleu - The RNS dated 24th Feb. 2021, confirmed new share options for directors, staff and consultants with an exercise price of 10p.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/award-of-share-options-m86nqgci5sa5gs0.html
Weren't there bonus put in place for sales and they were triggered above 10p? I'm miss-remembering but I thought there was something that triggered higher than 10p
We might get a clue to SP expectations if any further warrants are issued below the strike price of the last lot. Was that 10p ?
If any are issued below that then maybe that would indicate that expectations have fallen. Rampers please jump on my post one at a time and not all together to keep things orderly :-)
Jamesiecakes conservative calcs would value xtract ex Bushranger at circa 3p
If we look at a very conservative valuation of bushranger
Assuming:
1mt cu
$7500 POC
1.25% buy-out
0.83 conversion to £
= 7.8p
Yes I know, these are very,very low assumptions !
Absolute min valuation for xtr is 10p (7.8 +3)
Hence why I've been consistent in saying sp will hit 10p minimum at some point. Note I said MINIMUM !
You may wish to look at post from Jamesiecakes on 24 June.
This is perhaps a conservative view based on my analysis of Fairbride a few days ago
Can't give direct link to his post but scroll through his history from the link below.
PS hope that's okay JC
https://www.lse.co.uk/profiles/jamesiecakes/
Let's resolve this for you guys
Just look at the mcap which will give you a running upto date value. Currently 36.4 mil
How's that the stupidest post you've ever read? Jas is asking a genuine question, no need to put them down. I've asked numerous times, don't always get a reply but it's nice to get peoples opinions.
-.-- --- ..- / .- -... ... --- .-.. ..- - . / -... . .-.. .-.. / . -. -..
Stupidest post I've ever read
I got a lot of cash invested here. Wondering if any you guys no what the least amount this company is worth.
The average of the original smaller resource volume cant change obvs. But if then, outside of that original resource volume the assays are less than that original average then the average of the new larger volume has to be less does it not ?
Another simplified example regarding the average copper grade throughout a resource.
Where a resource of, for example 500mt, and 0.4% of that 500mt is estimated to be the amount of copper contained.
By lowering the economic cut off from 0.3 down to 0.15 at which substantially more of the lower grades are evident in comparison to higher grades, the average grade percent of copper within the whole ore body does not reduce proportionately.
So being at an average of 0.4 doesn’t reduce down to an average 0.3 because a load of assays have come in at 0.2. It’s all about the extra quantity of recoverable copper that keeps up the average grade which is the percentage of copper within the whole ore body.
My god it’s hard to explain but once you get your head around it ….bingo!
The average is a constant across the whole deposit, soon to be an upgraded resource for rc
The cut off is determined by processing costs and commodity prices. Hence a range is given in financial modelling that reflects these changes.
All ore within the pit will be processed, where an economic cut off is determined the plant is modified to accept above these minimum grades, ( to put it simply) what’s left below the cut off grade are in the tailings.
Just by increasing the cut off value by half eg. from 0.3 down to 0.15 it does not necessarily mean that just a double increase in the amount of recoverable copper as there will generally be considerably more copper at lower grades within the ore body, so potentially the recoverable copper at these lower grades could increase by much more than two or three times the tonnage as opposed to a higher cut off.
I think this is where some confusion lies from the perception that 2mt is not achievable from the results from phase 1 and 2
The first open pit technical presentation is also good.... overlays phase 1 drilling with historic holes and give a great scale of Racecourse alongside Ascot (which they hadn't yet found.... only surmised it's existance.
https://youtu.be/AEIwR_0S7SE
We could do with another one of these presentations to wet the appetite.
Sometimes it's good to look back at the original study....
The Conceptual Study concluded that the Racecourse deposit contains significant low-grade tonnes of copper and gold which may be economically recoverable at copper sale prices above US$4/lb. Optimal believe that the economic recovery and processing of ore with low grades between 0.1 - 0.2% Cu is pivotal for the economic viability of the Racecourse project, with the sensitivity analysis showing that for each 0.05% drop in cut-off grade the NPV drops by as much as AU$341 million. Overall, Optimal believe that taking account of the project's large size and relatively low grade, conditions should support the efficient and productive mining of the deposit. Optimisation of the processing plant capacity, capital cost, metallurgical recoveries and operating cost will improve the economic viability, and further opportunities exist to:
- Increase the size of the current Inferred Resource which will be critical to project viability;
- Analyse lower production rates, such as 12 or 15mpta;
- Evaluate further phase 1 and 2 pit designs; and
- Optimise dump development and the rehabilitation schedule.
Thanks for the info. All clear to me now!
· The samples were representative of the anticipated average copper grade of the deposit, ranging from 0.33-0.48% Cu, with minor silver (1.1g/t to 3.3g/t) and trace gold (0.007g/t to 0.04g/t), other than the more gold-rich Ascot sample which assayed 0.30g/t Au
I've re-read it, it says anticipated average copper grade. Is that the same as we anticipated a model last year?