Cobus Loots, CEO of Pan African Resources, on delivering sector-leading returns for shareholders. 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.
My musings a few weeks ago were that the open pit assessment was paving the path to force Anglo to relinquish their option rather than to bring them to the table in any serious manner. If another party is interested AA will need to relinquish their option to purchase and there will still be a Royalty to be paid to them.
Xeiger,
I would expect that to be a very definite advantage - if CB can find someone appropriate.
Looking at the cost of CAPEX for BR and I assume the concentrator is a big part with other processing equipment due to throughput required etc. Is it a more lucrative possibility to find a new Daddy already in the area who perhaps has some of this expensive CAPEX already paid for ?
CE & BTTS, yep. I agree. It's nice that everything that's found from now on adds to the financial case. But high grades do attract both investor and miners. Just look at the way investors lost interest when some of the grades did not reach the heady heights that were at one time expected.
Personally, based on the IP results I think the best of this resource will be found south of the currently planned open pit.
Hello Cygnus, I agree - but the point is that the cost of excavating the entire open pit area has already been factored in -The volume of pit costed for is many times that of the known resource and indications are that plenty more ore will be found within the modeled area... so any additional mineral found in the pit over and above the existing JORC deposit will effectively be mined for free.
Cygnus7. An open pit is just that. You can't poke around looking for the good bits.
CE, that's true enough as far as mining costs go, but processing costs are another story.
CE, I accept that volume is king in these geological systems but from a miners point of view grades must be very important. If you can get a tonne of copper from mining half the ore then that's a huge operational advantage to the miner. Good grades will mean a quick return on investment but yes, the shear size of the resource is what will decide whether the prospect is purchased or not.
Hello James,
Any extra material, regardless of grade (almost) within the open pit area ( huge) will be a free carry and will therefore add value - the mining cost for the whole mine is already covered in the open pit study. If there is an additional 2,000 tonnes of copper, it makes little difference whether it is at 0.2% or 0.5%
I stand by my comment regarding quantity rather than grade.
Hi CE
I disagree that this is all about quantity, if you look at the average grade mined in scenario 10 I think this works out to be 0.25% copper. So if we generate a huge volume of low grade material say 0.2% average the majority of this would be mined at the back end of the project (say 12 years from now, 3 year capex build plus 9 year LOM) so the economic value of this due to discounting will be relatively minimal for example all CF in year 12 would be discounted at .4 (10m undiscounted becomes 4m discounted, still nice to have but you get my point).
Therefore in my opinion what the economics of this project require is richer material (this was also confirmed in the podcast by Jeremy I think) let’s say 0.35% which can then be targeted in the earlier years of the project the additional margin of the higher grade material would significantly improve the economic metrics and attractiveness of the project to any buyer (independent valuer) e.g. NPV/IRR up, payback and BE copper price down.
Cheers
James
Hello Joe,
I agree. Also they will be able to tell by eye whether or not the mineralisation is continuous ( as they did in phase 1).
As this is now all about quantity rather than grades we should be able to put together a pretty good picture from site observations, even without the assay results.
Xeiger- That reminded me of an old post of mine back in April.
>> Think the giveaway clue to a further fund raise is when Colin starts using inanimate objects to refer to the size of this pawphry... like mountain or glacier.
Instead of root vegetables, mammalian or fruit.
We now have moved upscale to a “super yacht” so let’s hope the budget will take the project onwards to end of this phase.
Steve- >> 'no news is bad news' situation. Please, no. Just no.
Could almost give Lennon and McCartney a run for their money as a song writer if the investment goes **** up ;)
Almost..
What was said in the Podcast was that we would be getting Assay results (RNS) as they arrive, which will be every 1 to 2 weeks once we get the first ones back (5 or 6 weeks after the first 2 holes are finished).
So I take that as - expect to be kept updated every 1 to 2 weeks from sometime in the first half of September.. Nothing was said about how frequently we will get updates before then, but id like to think that they will endeavor to give us something. Especially as a they will be able, with XRF to confirm if any mineralisation is copper bearing as the drill samples are pulled out of the ground.
Thanks all.
Mr Bird,
Assuming we hit mineralisation with the drill can we please have some photos of the drill cores sitting in their trays. Along with the announcements on progress.
Steve, the only factor between now and then is Colin doesn't immediately need to fund raise ;-)
If news of a hole starting and finishing was deemed RNS worthy news during phase 1 (which it was), then I can't see the logic for thinking it would be different during phase 2. That said, I have no doubt they will use artist licence if and when it is convenient. And they may 'double up' news by providing info on the completion of a hole and the start of the new one at the same time. But I can't see us getting no drill hole news until the first assays are received back in 5-6 weeks time because we'd go back into an unbearable 'no news is bad news' situation. Please, no. Just no.
Grouping them in any big way would be inconsistent with the team said in the 'podcast/video' discussion. What wasn't clear (to me at least) was whether they were going to wait for the assay results before releasing any info about the drill holes. So I don't know whether we are imminently going to get an RNS saying the first two drills holes have been completed or whether we will have to wait the 3-4 weeks they suggested getting the assay results would take.
I think if any news is going to easily leak it will be that a drill has finished so if this rise is sustained I think an RNS will come today or tomorrow, if a sustained rise and no RNS I reckon they aren't going to be doing them after every 2 holes and instead group them.
I scanned RNS and didn't see a definitive depth but 8000m and 13 holes planned worked out at 615 metres, that doesn't stop some being longer and some being shorter I guess....
Hi Steve re drilling depth I had the notion that the first batch of holes would primarily be focused on extending the pit and so depth would be max 650 - 700 metres. Now I cannot remember where I got this from, be it interview or RNS, so perhaps to be taken with a pinch of salt unless others can corroborate !
Hi Ella - At approx. 27 minutes in, Dr Quintin is talking about the drill programme and the two rigs on site. He then said...
"We'll have a very regular stream of announcements and results coming out to the market for the next six months."
I guess it is open to interpretation but I interpreted 'results' as the assay results (possible updates to the financial model too), which leave drill start and ends as 'announcements'. We'll find out soon enough I guess.
I don't remember hearing that we would get updated for every hole start and finish... just that over the next 6 months there would be regular progress updates. So that could mean as and when they choose I suppose ?
Steve,
I did listen to the interview but can't recall if it was confirmed we would get told when the holes completed?
By the end of the day, the first drill hole could even be getting close to 1,000m in length. If it is at an angle of 45 degrees, then that would make it approx 700m below the surface.... could they be pointing it right at the guts of the thing i.e. the 'funnel' we can see on the IP survey? If they are aiming for that, which goes off the IP survey scale at 850m, then the drill could still be turning well into next week.
Now that I've parted with that bit of insightful wisdom... expect an 11am RNS saying the hole is finished!
First two holes should be drilled down to 600m by now, surely moving onto the next. Will we be getting RNS for every drill and mineralisation as we did in Phase 1?