Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. 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.
Hi Butlerman it’s not likely to be the case that ‘no’ more drilling is required even if the PEA comes back very favourable. As per the requirement for the decision to mine, stated by CB, they will want to see a PFS, and mineral resource inputs required state clearly that it will need some of the resource at least to be measured. So some extra infill is a necessity in that respect.
A PEA or scoping study determines if a project has potential to be economically viability. A pre-feasibility study determines whether a probable mineral reserve ‘is’ economically viable and a feasibility study determines whether the reserve can be economically mined.
https://mining.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/img_59a7468ece12f.png
So is likely the PFS may be required for only the initial early mining phase to show recovery of CapEx.
That’s my understanding unless someone can advise otherwise.
My impression is that we will definitely do a bit more infill drilling as guided by the economic model. To get most "bangs for our bucks " rathe than more exploration drilling. Maybe another 10 drills in strategic areas where the model wants more definition or certainty.
I'm confident for a sale at some point in next 12 to 18 months and I still think 10 to 15p is likely rather than just possible.
Obviously POC will be a massive driver in that and IF POC takes off like some think by end of 2023 then we may be looking at low 20s but I think that is, realistically, the very optimistic case notwithstanding POC going into orbit at $15K+ within a year which seems very unlikely in that timescale.
Andrew, it’s anyones guess until the pit/economic model is produced. I’m hoping that RC and Ascot prove viable without any further drilling and Colin accepts an offer, with the buyer knowing that some more drilling will probably take it to over 2MT. So whilst I’d take 10p, I’m still hoping that BR is worth more than that to a major. The model can’t be that far away!
Butler
We wont be getting just 10p.
Remember what CB said re a 10p offer in 2021.....
"I'd tell 'em they could stick it "
Hmmm. I wonder what he really would do now if offered 10p.....
With my average now being 5p, I’d be very happy with 20p, Howezap. I’d even be happy with 10p!
They throw in the disclaimer at the beginning of each and every interview, “ Nothing in this podcast is intended as investment advise and the people in this podcast may hold positions in the stocks they talk about…..” They can all then, pretty much say what they want.
The jury is still out on wether the project is viable, but I’m sure ‘if’ and when BR is sold, wether that be in ‘23 or ‘24, that, will ultimately be CB’s saving grace, ‘nothing less.’ Even if it’s sold for less than individuals own expectations, would those individuals be too disappointed with only making, for example, 4 times their capital investment instead of maybe the many more multiples anticipated by them, from CB’s past rhetoric on quantity, and timescales too!
I would love to see a proper interview done by Matthew Gordon at crux investor!
CB would get destroyed if he said the same things to MG as he did in his other interviews !
Really, it should be stated that Roast/Zac 'interviews' are a 'Paid Promotion'
In addition, the roast boys do a lot of "editorial comment" in the interviews - much more so than zak does. They dont just give CB a platform to promote his companies they actively promote the company themselves through their own views and comments.
I found this more noticeable than when Zak does the "interviews " (sic) who seems to make only two comments :
at the start "hows things with Xtract Colin" and then at the end "thanks Colin and bye"
It reflects badly on them. Just so long as they get that when money is lost due to Colin over promising on their platform.
CB uses Zak and the Roast boys to promote his companies. As others have said, the roast boys are paid in shares and never question him on any failures. Its not an interview but a paid promotion.
It would seem somewhat more than just coincidence that out of nearly 1000 AIM companies the roast boys pick most of, or all of CB companies to recommend as a stock pick or regularly cover !
I wonder why? :)
>>I believe is in some way paid for. - They are paid in shares I believe.
Bear in mind the Roast podcasts are not wholly independent of the companies that they cover. It is part of the PR activities of XTR and I believe is in some way paid for. This accounts for the less than intensive grilling (sorry, roasting) that shareholders may feel would be appropriate sometimes.
Since they have more background information than most it will certainly send out a big message if they have felt it appropriate to not include XTR at around 2p considering they were more than happy to tip XTR at much higher SP only a few months ago.
AFP and Xtract amongst the 12 stocks last year. Already this year the picks so far, have included AFP again, and Galileo from the CB stable. Interested to see if the roast boys have lost any of their confidence and in their support for Xtract to include this year.
Still 6 more to go.
I'll/d not bother even looking into such rules Andrew, as - 'as a rule' - CB seems to take AiM rules as guidlines more than rules.
Happy NY All
Adv..showing some substantial buys including one at the long overdue price of 2p and a rise of +.05. My broker ii showing +0.1.
Is it too early to break out the Guinness?
Happy to see rise on last day of trading for 22. Let the correction begin.
GL
NtM
I'm not too bothered when we get them but I wonder if there is some Aim rule that states you have to get quarterly results out within a certain time period? That period being within 3 months of the end period?
As this is our only current declared income stream, it could be considered to have a material affect on the SP - hence it may have to be released tomorrow ?
I think the FB start up has a few teething problems hence why Empress said first results will be out by q4 then said or q1. I suspect we wont get FB results until February.
I would be very surprised if we didnt get alluvial results tomorrow for the reasons I've already stated - but I could be wrong !
If he could get a Fairbride Gold production figure for Dec by early Jan, then i'm all for CB waiting til early Jan to give us that Q3 results update, Andrew. (we've waited this long.. so what's another week )
ZM >>>I, for one, would like to see a share consolidation as a penny stock with 860million shares in issue does present a rather less than serious image, and points to a history of multiple cash calls.<<
Thank you for the response, that was my original rationale ZM. If and when the company does cement that position to be self funding with positive cash flow then it’s likely at some point there will also be up to a billion shares in issue. So a share consolidation ‘after’ full dilution would certainly represent more a reflective image once that ‘potential’ financial position is achieved and with the stable of quality assets and the potential they all hold.
Certainly with some luck and continued good strategy, can see mid cap potential as Xtracts development as producer and an explorer grows.
Quick fire summary update is reflected by copper futures continued uncertainty. But with supply shortages, its expected to see the copper price rise next year at least. Then once global demand ramps up then it will surely see copper rise above all time high of $5.02 per pound in set in March 22.
Since the $4.62 lb previous high back in 2011, current copper price would need to hit roughly a minimum of $6 lb to be the same value taking into account, inflation adjustment and any erosion of the US dollar since 2011.
Copper futures are set to close December at $3.8 per pound, booking a 15% decline in the year as sharp recession concerns offset the looming supply worries for the metal, a key gauge for global economic activity. Soaring Covid cases and an unstable, debt-ridden property market in top consumer China pressured the world’s second-largest economy and reduced demand for industrial inputs in the year, underscored by the NBS showing contraction in Chinese factory activity for seven months of the year. Still, looming shortage worries limited declines and ramped up expectations for higher prices in 2023. Output from top producer Chile slid 6.7% in the first three quarters of the year, while mine protests in Peru added to low production. Commodity trader Trafigura warned that global copper stocks have fallen to record lows, with current inventories being enough to supply world consumption for just 4.9 days. Also, mining giant Glencore estimated a supply shortfall of 50 million tonnes in 2023.
* trading economics.com
Good post!
A very thin day of trading with only 11 individual trades completed. Almost the whole circa 800,000 volume was accounted for by a 500,000 trade classified by ADVFN as a 'sell'. However a poster on another board posted his trade confirmation for that trade which was indeed a buy, albeit below the mid-price. The slight tick up in SP occurred at 8am thanks to a UT trade of just 67,233.
I, for one, would like to see a share consolidation as a penny stock with 860million shares in issue does present a rather less than serious image, and points to a history of multiple cash calls. A higher SP/lower shares in issue would also allow for tighter spreads and finer % movements in the share price. Both of these effects should lead to greater traded volumes and will bring in new blood to the shareholder base.
I think I'm right in saying that we have never had alluvial quarter results later than 3 months after the end period. I think 30 Sept was the latest ever and that was for Q2 results ending 30 June.
So unless we are going to have alluvial results later than a full quarter, which has never happened before, we should get Q3 results tomorrow.
I will be interested in Guy Fawkes results as they seem to be increasing production. From Q2 "The results for the June quarter are fairly consistent with previous quarters with Guy Fawkes slowly opening up areas for production. "
Less than 50Kg poor, 50kg to 60 kg expected, more than 60Kg good. (IMHO)