The latest Investing Matters Podcast episode featuring Jeremy Skillington, CEO of Poolbeg Pharma has just been released. Listen 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.
Hopefully we'll reach 4p before AGM! Still ridiculously low so I'll be very bold and say 5p.
The results are usually good for this quarter (and Q3) and historically released less than a month after the period ends. I wonder if CB is waiting to release them just before the AGM next week? A nice hors d'oeuvre ??
If not, then it will be nearly 2 months since end of period and that could imply they may be average at best?
I think it more likely we will get them just prior to AGM.
We'll see.
Yes, sounds like the CEO of AA is laying the groundwork for justifying an acquisition.
“If we find something that’s on our sheet already, that’s at the right price, that we can afford to do it at that point in time, I don’t think we’d be scared to do it.” so they are definitely looking!!
Let's hope so. I would be surprised if our beloved leader isn't exchanging a few pleasentries with one or more potential buyers. Blessings be upon his head :)
LOL thats mean :)
I don’t know if anyone else has seen this but the CEO of AA is unsure where all the copper needed is going to come from! They must be talking to XTR if they know there is a shortage.
https://m.miningweekly.com/article/anglo-americans-new-boss-sounds-warning-on-future-copper-supply-2022-07-29/rep_id:3861
Andmillsy,
Thanks for the numbers and rationale.
Wow, I thought it was this morning! Mental clocks wrong. Maybe that's what Colin is suffering from.
Hahaha I forgot I put that here this morning.
The only 'official' info we have on the buyback clause is in the original RNS and the wording is open to interpretation. Now we are getting close, we really need to find out the details at the AGM.
AA have a one time opportunity to buy back into the project before it falls away, unless any part of the project is in Xtracts half excluding the half way line. And any part of that resource…..no hang on that’s not right is it ?
no
Can anyone on here tell me how the AA buy back clause works?
On the contrary Butlerman, let’s not get caught up in being happy with sub 2mt. The resource target for the buy back is a really important threshold for the company. With Jeremy Reid also implying the significance of getting to 2mt as soon as possible. It is the primary option to trigger the first right of refusal of a buy back in what a binding agreement. The only way the company can be free of it is if AA pass up on their option once 2mtCuEq minimum is put to them and or the decision to mine. Or have the decency to let Xtract be freed from it.
Having the decision to mine alongside the 2mt will, as CB has implied will, “put them up n a stronger position around the negotiating table.”
Xtract are going up against a major mining company that are not going to be a push over. That is the bottom line, but my point was originally to sway the opinion of the doubters that believe that CB has been ‘too overly optimistic ’ or is simply holding back information because that is what he ‘usually’ does. Too add some weight to his claims by referring to the project directors similar claims too. Surely his claim holds more clout!
Over the past year we have all seen the futile attempts of knowledgeable members to guesstimate tonnages from RC with only crude methods of guessing the parameters. Without having the modelling software available that takes into account all the subtleties and idiosyncrasies of mineralisation trends throughout the deposit from the raw data it is almost impossible to have any degree of accuracy.
Even though time has passed CB has still not deviated from his original estimates for RC.
The 2mt only becomes irrelevant and not worth focussing on when the resource exceeds that threshold.
I get the sense that we are becoming overly absorbed in our board about whether or not we hit 2Mt. And that the feeling almost is binary - we hit 2Mt and make a lot of money, or we fall short of 2Mt and make nothing ( or very little). This just isn’t the case. The only relevance of 2Mt is that it gives AA first right of refusal. If, say, we just had 1.5Mt, then I’ve no doubt that AA and many others would offer us a considerable amount of money for the licence. (Not as much as for 2Mt, obviously, but still a nice wedge). We are proving up a very attractive ore body, near a power line, very close to a major city, in a mining friendly country. And with the demand for copper, as the mine expands into lower CuEq %’s, which aren’t economic now, will almost certainly be in the future, with the gap in supply and demand as the world electrifies. This provides another compelling reason to buy the licence. So, so long as we declare a reasonable resource ( my view, 1Mt+) I’m convinced we will have our hand bitten off. And I’m not saying we don’t have 2Mt+ - we may well have, and that would be brilliant, but let’s not get depressed or caught up in the view that we have to get 2Mt to make money.
The grades at racecourse we are seeing are typical of low grade porphyry ore of around the 0.2 - 0.3 with a higher grade crown that has already been drilled and modelled from the original 71mt inferred resource that gives a 0.44 Cu average at 0.3 cut off. It is these high grade zones, that make any porphyry deposits economical. The extent of racecourse mineralisation beyond the main inferred resource was not likely continue to be in the 0.44 range toward the outer margins and as such would be in line with expected results. As with the majority of the Boda system, it has typical grades between 0.2-0.3 with high grade deeper breccia zone that will make Boda economical. Similar bulk low grades in the range are seen at the Cadias too.
So grades certainly appear to be quite normal across the deposit. With an estimate from project director Jeremy Reid that a resource increase from 71mt to around 400-450mt will be there abouts to hit the 2mtCuEq target at a 0.44 average. This is with that economic cut off at 0.3Cu
The resource average grade will come down from 0.44 Cu but as has been stated the cut off will reduce from 0.3 down to 0.15 (expected) so it’s looking promising and in line with Colin’s repeated claims of 2mt or closer to it, from roughly 400mt+ of rock from calcs for Racecourse alone. The further infill drilling to improve the high grade lol recoveries in the early mine phase will also have a positive effect on those average grades if evaluation of the model warrants it.
Incidentally, if more credibility can be added to Colins comments on the project in the body of recent RNS’s, would that not then, give a degree of credibility toward not only Colin’s repeated claims of 2mt but also Jeremy Reid’s comments in interview? In fact I would say Jeremy’s comment gives credibility to Colin’s!
As iceberg put it, believing all what a CEO says is like believing all a car dealer says. I would not think that Jeremy Reid would want to sully his own professional integrity by making unrealistic claims.
Sentiment has changed direction somewhat this week, I wonder what news Colin is saving for the day before the AGM.
Ten days to go.
You can see clearly from the Legacy Minerals presentation and their quarterly report what a long ambitious task they have ahead of them, early days in their discovery of rockley, with some other projects similar in position not having been drilled yet with varying EM surveying and sampling done. They are into a $4.5m drill campaign JV with a drilling company to give shareholders more “discovery exposure” in addition to currently planned campaigns in two of their other projects. Although not at Rockley.
Would not like to guess how much of the current 12m MC of the company they will eventually have to give away to pull off any ‘meaningfull’ success in exploration and over time.
Giving away part of your company or funding through placements is what it is with exploration for small caps, and with no guarantees at any point of a successful outcome.
Xtract are in a different league with the ability now to self fund its exploration from income which puts them In an enviable position from other juniors.
Always worth the reminder what a healthy position they are actually in anyway, let alone the timing of being in the right space at the right time and with rising copper and gold prices particularly.
Thanks for sharing those figures. Shows what a difference a small increase/decrease makes to profits. I wouldn't be surprised if gold is over $2000 an ounce and £ is 1-1 with the dollar next year. Admittedly I am more bearish with the copper price next year than Colin and many on here are. For all the criticism of Colin I do think bringing Manica on line is a great achievement and he should be shouting about it.
I make you right Ice. The stars are all aligning. Reach for the sky.
Get your check books out mining companies
First come first serve maybe.....
https://www.mining.com/web/codelco-turns-to-artificial-intelligence-to-squeeze-out-more-copper-from-aging-mines/
Thanks iceberg and XTRe are so well positioned with Manica to benefit if gold strengthens
Empress have updated their monthly report and stated Manica expected commercial production in Q4 2022.
https://empressroyalty.com/investors/presentation/
They are also showing revenue from Manica as $2M in 2023.
Short headline is Ithis equates to Xtract EBITDA of US$10.5m p.a. at gold price of $1817 per oz.
A $55 movement in gold price moves Xtract EBITDA by $500k p.a. (up or down).
Full rationale:
Empress $2M p.a. is at 3.375% royalty rate and $1750 their assumed gold price per oz means they are forecasting about 34,000 oz of gold to be produced.
I think they are being conservative in this assumption as it could be as much as 42,000 tonnes per month processed with a yield of 2.62g/t (from XTR website) so producing 1300kg of gold per year which is about 45,000 oz per year. I recall Colin stating 100kg per month (yes it was in an interview)
Jamiescakes gave an estimated operating cost of $667 per oz and this seems realistic, maybe even high, based on AISC for Aussie gold producers
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KHqF-ARKmgn1MluerdxnxfYR6TH4DPsT/view?usp=drivesdk
So at today's spot price $1817 operating profit of $1150 per oz assuming $667 operating cost, on a middle ground volume of 40,000 oz p.a. @23% share = US$10.5m p.a. EBITDA.
The copper price has really risen.
https://mobile.twitter.com/IcebergShares/status/1558179363690106880
The gold price is doing well
Xtr is really really primed to go up sharply.
I don't normally make price predictions but this is screaming loudly.
Rockley, as most are probably aware, is close to EL5574.
Legacy have in earlier corporate presentations referenced Bushranger.
Interesting to see that we are now being referenced in their recent ASX announcement .
https://wcsecure.weblink.com.au/pdf/LGM/02545817.pdf
Few extracts:
1. Other significant explorers and miners in the Rockley-Gulgong belt include Newmont (NYSE: NEM), Alkane Resources, (ASX: ALK) and Xtract Resources Plc (AIM: XTR).
2. The tenement is located less than 15km from the emerging Bushranger Cu-Au porphyry held by Xtract Resources (AIM: XTR). The Rockley Project is also considered prospective for shear zone hosted gold and copper.
3. Remanent magnetism may also exhibit a negative response as seen at the Bushranger Prospect
Great to see we're being mentioned in the same sentence as the big boys and the fact that the approach at Bushranger is deemed as successful and being referenced and used by other explorers.
The whole report has a lot of information which others may get value or insights from.