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.
Going to get strategically interesting in the next couple of days / weeks if (when) the Inflation Reduction Act gets passed (hopefully today?).
As if there wasn’t one already, this would be a clear sign for long term copper and the need for mines for next 20-30+ years and provide green light for large scale mining investment.
Time to get your cheque book out AA.
Cu$8,139. Good to see it above 8k again.
General summary for Ascot but concludes with both
31st may
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/ascot-prospect-drill-results-summary-0p0379d63vj8pug.html
Conclusion
>>The Phase 2 Drilling Programme at the Racecourse and Ascot prospects has intersected copper-gold mineralisation over 3km of strike length which forms a copper-gold mineralised trend that compares favourably to the mineralised porphyries at Newcrest's world-class Cadia mine and the Alkane's Boda-Kaiser trend which also occur over 3km of strike (refer to ASX announcement by Alkane Resources Limited 11 May 2022).
Ascot and Racecourse have similar widths of copper-gold mineralisation, with Ascot containing thicker and higher-grade gold intersections in comparison to Racecourse. Xtract is undertaking further assessment to understand the economic potential of these thicker, higher grade gold intersections, particularly at shallower depths. The Ascot mineralisation has currently been drilled over 750m of strike length and is open to the south and at depth. Geological data suggests that an equivalent to the best mineralised "crown" position above the porphyry at the Racecourse prospect, has not yet been intersected at Ascot. This provides further upside to what already one of the most significant greenfields porphyry copper-gold discovery in the Lachlan Fold Belt since the discovery of Boda in 2019. Xtract's assessment of the Ascot prospect is ongoing.
That is it I guess, after all is just a summary and followed up with the interviews.
For the reasons that has already been discussed (more believable and credible), my understanding was that an interim summary would have been, at least, in writing and hopefully via RNS.
Does seem strange that the intent was announcement in a very professional manner via an RNS and the result was done by an informal interview with all the vagaries that that method of communication contains (as previously acknowledged by many already)
It would not surprise me if we got an RNS with an interim summary of RC and Ascot in the next month or two
Interim followed up also with kev and Phil on 8th June for the record
https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNjQ0MzcucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wNi0wNzovcG9zdHMvODA5Njk4NA%3D%3D
Hi Andrew I believe it followed straight after on the 31st may although titled ‘Ascot prospect drill result summary’ it concludes at the bottom with an overall summary that includes Racecourse.
Followed same day with a podcast with Zak
https://podcasts.google.com?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNTExMzMucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wNS0zMTovcG9zdHMvODA5MjcxNg%3D%3D
Yes agreed.
RNS should be much more believable than what is said in an interview and does contain a degree of legality and can't be walked back from.
Unless Ive missed this interim summary (I may have) then should we not have had the interim summary by now?
It stated "shortly" and that was 2.5 months ago in an RNS.
27 May RNS
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/bushranger-project-assay-results-gxq7ur5ugggwkj5.html
"We intend to issue a release shortly that gives an interim summary of the Racecourse and Ascot prospects."
Very much agree. An RNS is quality controlled.
Personally that’s why I can’t wait for the jorc - whatevr it’s size. Like an RNS it has a degree of legality and meaning that can’t be walked back from.
There is a fair argument I’ll agree regarding wether or not Colin has been over optimistic in his estimates in podcasts, but the same cannot necessarily be said from comments in RNS.
17th may RNS
>> Modelling continues at the project, with the Racecourse prospect indicating that it has grades and tonnes justifying a rework of the conceptual open pit."
30th June RNS
>>The phase 2 exploration programme is about to be completed and when we have modelled and evaluated all the raw information, we will be well advanced on the value curve and able to position the project in the global market.
30th June RNS
>>In general, our exploration activities in Australia have been extremely encouraging and without a doubt we have discovered a major system, well beyond our original expectations.
The first is significant in that it supports the decision to mine. The second suggests at the very least the resource model confirms there is adequate tonnage for purpose. I personally now don’t care now what CB said in the past as a hook, as long as the objectives are now met at a ‘minimum.’
I’ll say we, as I am guilty too, of putting too much reliance on what CB has said in the past, even the 2mt target and possibly the buy back agreement in general.
The RNS excerpts highlighted, have been included in the body of the RNS’s, although both are Colin’s comments, the latter from year report, they surely hold more credibility over the interview comments, with a strong inference that phase 2 objectives have been met.
That’s all that matters as a baseline target for a likely outcome of a total sale of asset.
That’s originally why I invested.
The eventual value of BR is dependent on fine margins. If these vary just minimally then the numbers can mushroom quickly. There's mention this morning of 10 & 15 p but if theiceberg is correct and the license (RC & Ascot) totals, say 2.5 MT, a value of 10K/T of Cu is assumed and we get a buy out % for Cu in the ground of 3% (each of which are very possible) then the value per share is of the order of 60p each.
I'm not saying we will get that but this all depends on fine margins and if some of the numbers go our way the current hand wringing is going to look rather silly.
"I don't understand why you would take a CEO-chairman on his word wrt targetx."
Yep completely agree. Hence my points below
I don't understand why you would take a CEO-chairman on his word wrt targetx. It's like believing a used cars salesman or even a new car dealership where they say a car can do70 mpg but in reality it's nearer 45.
Nobody is saying he's lying, but a future projection is NOT a fact, he a forward statemen t.
That being said I have no doubt the license contains more than 2MT.
I've said many times how ambitious 2MT is and even 1MT is worth far more than our current mcap.
I don't understand being cross with a CEO because he's only making your 100-400% rather than 500-1000%.
Btw copper is continuing to rocket up (at least in commodity terms) back above 8000t.
We won't get 10p, it will have to be 15p or above to give the guys working on it thier Brucie bonus.
No point having options at 10p otherwise. L
Therefore Colin and the team have to continue drilling and adding value till they are happy.
I will be staying.away from this board as much as I possibly can as this will be going on for at least another 6 months, possibly 12.
So much for jorc in January........
"if we come up short, his credibility will be in pieces"
Possibly.
If we are just short of the 2mt, say 1.8mt then I doubt anyone will be wanting to be too critical of CB. Obviously the risk of criticism will increase as the tonnage gets lower.
That said, even at, say, 0.9mt declared, the more forgiving shareholders may take to the view that all CB had done is do what we all know he does - be overly optimist with his predictions and comments. So why be surprised or, moreover, annoyed when someone who is always optimistic is....optimistic!
This would not be my view (if it was just 0.9mt) . If we explained all CBs failures away by using that excuse then CB will never be accountable when results, not matter how bad, did not match forward guidance or predictions.
It is a matter of subjective opinion. Some may take the view that at say, at 1.4mt, CB has been deliberately deceptive and others, at the same tonnage, conclude he's been slightly optimistic.
My own view? As ever the results will very likely be much lower then CBs forward guidance , but good enough to ensure a buy-out at a sp significantly higher that what it is now and good enough to keep most shareholders from being critical of CB.
After a buy-out of say 10p , the different conclusions of a subjective view, that CB had been either: a bit optimistic or very optimistic or deliberately deceptive or a liar - will probably be irrelevant and forgotten about.
Well, that's what CB will be hoping :)
I see your point. However is it not less than a month of expected time scales. Therefore we might be a little premature on creating the lynch mob. So long as he hasn't completely lied to us, he might be forgiven for a reasonable over run. Which i would think timing is a very difficult thing to get right all factirs considered. I for one like to stay till the end and see things through. To my detriment on occasion i might add
The f,ct is that CB has alluded on more than one occasion, albeit not by RNS, that 2mt is a walk in the park. We can all say do your own research but chats with Sunday Roast and Zac are part of that research and if we come up short, his credibility will be in pieces.
The share maybe fluctuating for various reasons. There has been no negative changes. In fact we have made additions in all avenues and yet our loyalty and trust is being tested. Stick to the common cause and hold ranks. Why should we consider running when we invested at a point of much higher risk initially. XTR is at a point of any news will see this share move significantly upwards.
Hi howezap
Thanks for your reply, yes I understand what you are saying, I for one am committed to the future for Xtract but thought I had missed something more worrying with the headline "after Bushranger " I've topped up again to bring my Average down, upwards and onwards and fingers crossed.
I would ‘not’ have thought they would realistically want to do that Steve, if even they could.
From report
>> The phase 2 exploration programme is about to be completed and when we have modelled and evaluated all the raw information, we will be well advanced on the value curve and able to position the project in the global market.
The cut off will be determined by the financial model and will be key to resource viability.
I do think your previous idea that once the models are released with planning on a 3rd phase ongoing it will prompt AA to show their hand. All CB’s comments and more importantly the statements released in RNS all point to a scenario that still involves determining AA’s intent.
2MT AA buyback agree price and sold, bingo F100 happy bunny
F100
One option could be to announce a JORC with a higher cut-off that doesn't break 2mt, which would comply with market regulations and avoid triggering the buy-back. That gives the market chance to look at the asset, while we are still protected by the buyback, and allows time to do more drilling while we wait for market conditions to improve.
We could use the current copper price to justify a higher cut-off and then lower the cut-off when the copper price increases, allowing us to trigger the buy-back at our convenience. Although probably AA have thought of that ahead of time and specified a cut-off in the buy-back agreement.
>> one could just as easily make the argument that if you had been overly optimistic and unrealistic with expectations provided to investors
Well, if you think that is the case, you should probably sell ahead of the bad news.
He is going to have to announce it to the market before trying to find more resources though.
Steve, one could just as easily make the argument that if you had been overly optimistic and unrealistic with expectations provided to investors, would you come out and announce this admission in a bad market, or would you hide behind the bad market excuse to keep a lid on it and buy time while you try to find more resource to substantiate previously made claims?
Timeline of sept /oct for both JORC and predictions of a copper recovery by some analysts including our Colin, tally nicely.
It seemed an obscure comment at the time by him, but maybe it gives some indication of their intent the fact that he did mention it.