Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
Valuing-
Is very likely the NPV will be derived from a DCF model.
PFS -
You can start to see where the quality of the work and the project decision making from the experienced team comes into building the resource and why. In the past CB has spoken about what the team are doing with the quality of their work being second to none with the data pack they are putting together that will be good enough for any major.
-Valuation of projects
https://insights.csaglobal.com/valuation-of-exploration-projects/
-Why pre feasibility studies are important
https://insights.csaglobal.com/why-pfs-really-matter/
-Market value v NPV
https://insights.csaglobal.com/market-value-doesnt-match-npv/
Rolls Royce is tangible
The Rolls Royce may look great, but lets hope if you lift up the bonnet it has an engine in it :)
For those interested I was informed a few years ago that a outlet like Proactive would charge a company circa £30k a year for their 'services' this would include media interviews, written coverage and 2 presentation events (usually in London)
Every now and then you will see an AIM company issue shares to what they describe as ' a service provided' often to the value IRO of £30k.
Over recent times I have noticed companies prefer to spread the PR across a number of providers, Stockbox, Crux, Sharetalk and Roast come to mind - my bet is a company will budget £30k-£40k for PR.
Cost for a stand at the UK Investor Show as an example was IRO £5k for the day a couple of years ago, more prestigious events over 2 or 3 days like Mines and Money were circa £20k.
I would imagine a 30 minute interview by Roast or Zak would cost a relatively modest sum therefore.
In all honesty, ‘any’ good news is still going to be wasted in this economic environment right now, yes it may create some immediate buying pressure, but as we have seen over the past six to 9 months, it will inevitably pull back again under what has always been minimal selling pressure. So when tighter monetary policies are eased and there is more stability in leading economies, buying confidence will finally return.
An RNS to announce a company asset presentation? Current investors will have all they need to know already and potential new investors should be making the company website their first port of call anyway, so I don’t really see the benefit.
A question for Bird at the AGM, I'd like to know how we are paying them too! - Could well be the roast team dumping shares of late...
So what are we, shareholders, paying Roast & Zak for in their PR role?
"Right individuals in place across all his companies......"
Problem is that a lot of those capable people are sread over many of CB's companies. Do a spreasheet, companies, obviously not all 20 +, across the top, list of directors against each company below and look for commonality!
Well well, Dani Baker, used to love him on the radio in the nineties
CB has the right individuals in place across all his companies with the specific capabilities, values, and experience to manage and move projects forward. If he couldn’t keep on top of his own workload across his various companies, he is astute enough to do something about it. If it were at the detriment of any those particular businesses. ??As an example, he stepped down from jubilee metals as at that time he felt a more suitable candidate with different set of skills would be better for them in the next phase of their evolution as a company. CB admitted his skills were more appropriate to companies which are at an earlier stage of their development.
He has vast experience needed to grow xtract into a ‘sustainable’ mining and exploration company, now that the company is at a pivotal point in its own development. There will be increasing, positive cash flow to sustain that growth now.
Succession planning, I hope not! Just be another CB, spread so thin he would be hardly visible, as CB is!
MD of a company in the Nordic area and talking about Zambia, how does that work?
What CB’s companies need is individual attention, not “today is Wednesday so it must be TIR” or such like. Less of the thin spread and more attention to getting some shareholder returns, sadly lacking across the board of CB companies currently.
Don’t forget Caerus Minerals in Cyprus. JV with Bzt and either JLP or GLR, not sure which, but that went stunningly well!
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Martyn+Churchouse&rls=com.microsoft:en-GB:{referrer:source?}&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7ADFA_en#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:c5fe43b8,vid:1oetnrw5u0w
Comes across OK - Certainly seems more pragmatic than Bird
Not sure how up to date this is but here’s some background on Martin Churchouse:
Martyn is a geologist with over 35 years’ experience in Europe and Africa in exploration, mine development, feasibility and as a mine manager. He worked for Anglo American and Gold Fields before joining the Junior Mining Sector and has been involved in bringing several exploration companies to the AIM Market. Martyn was an adviser to Georgian Mining Corporation prior to which he was Senior Adviser New Business Development to Lundin Mining Corporation. He has been responsible for a number of discoveries and successful definitive feasibility studies.
Ours was also prepared by Martyn Churchouse.
MC has some involvement in a number of CBs companies and is MD of Kendrick Resources. He was on the Sunday roast talking about our latest Zambia asset
Succession planning by CB??
New Corporate presentations have appeared across a number of Colin’s companies over the last few days. None of them announced / RNS’d , but the websites updated at the same time
The Galileo one appears to have been prepared by Martyn Churchouse. They are all in a very similar style
Perhaps this points to a new approach to marketing / commas.
Great first post MaBaker
Very similar to the first post by Dani and Russiangirl and Bauhaus :)
Year lows.... anyone have any opinions?
Aeris post from last Saturday 20.07
>>>The RNS mentions that a 250 tonne bulk sample is being analysed at Kabwe. Possibly at Jubilee’s Sable plant
Spot on Aeris, mett test work completed by Jubilee metals group. The new presentation states they have ‘agreed’ with Kabwe refinery to process and sell the ore too.
Sceptics need not be sceptical
I tracked down Oval’s head office to a portacabin in a storage facility so just called their number. A nice lady said the boss was unavailable for comment but there was ‘nothing to be concerned about.’ She said the boss is currently p155ing it up in the Bahamas and will get him to give me a call back on his return.
So that’s really encouraging!
You’re welcome
Guy
From the Kakuyu JV agreement?>>reimburse US$90,000 to Oval in respect of stripping and mining to date on the Kakuyu Project, to be settled from cash flow by the reduction of Xtract's percentage share of net profit from 60% to 20% for the period required to reimburse Oval.
Appears Xtr have paid back Oval the cash for pre strip and previous mine work directly up front. Rather than taken from cash flow.
From ‘23 presentation
Xtract refunded US$90k to JV partner for historic pre- stripping work and a further US$60k for the first month of pre-production mining. Recouped from cash flow
Could be construed as showing there is a good business rapport already between xtr and oval. As of first cash flow now, it would suggest xtr would now receive full 60% net profit from start up as opposed to reduction to 20% during payback to Oval. Has made for a simpler process but shows good will too from xtract.
The extra $60k comes from a ‘separate’ mining contract agreement with Oval paid up front for the initial start up which is recouped from cash flow too.
Should that be PFS Andrew ?
Just checking
Yes its frustrating, but I still believe there is a good chance of a substantial re rate from FB income (at full capacity) and Bushranger. But we may have to wait until second half of the year before that happens (yes I know thats not what CB said :)
Apart from the usual missed timescales etc, one of my main frustrations is CBs obsession with Zambia and trying to find the next big thing.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."
Just focus all time and money on FB and Bushranger FFS !!
Hi Steve you’re not missing anything, just the usual, good disciple bad disciple stuff, same stuff different days.
Granted gixxer my only response on Kalengwa is that it was mined alright for 12 odd years beforehand. Economics of it would be swings and roundabouts comparatively then and now of course, but the reason given it was subordinated, was its remoteness and lack of power, so for all we know they could be waiting for copper price to rise, and or the company being in a stronger financial position and when more company resources become available. As we know they have been concentrating all in house efforts on BR which may explain why Kalengwa was deemed to be not as important.
Just a theory that does hold some credibility.