We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey 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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxxNbFw9Fbk Oct 2020 interview
While we are waiting for the 2mt to be confirmed and AA to make $500M offer, I had a look back at an old interview CB gave. It was one of his most interesting and informative - talking about all the projects.
CB did it nearly 2 years ago (Oct 2020)
Interview starts with CB at 28 mins
A few observations:
1. POG had risen to $6.7K at the time of the interview and CB expected it to hit $7.5K by next year (Oct 2021) It is that now even after the massive fall. Just shows how high POC has risen over last 2 years.
2. Timeframe stated for FB in production was a year away ie Oct 2021 at $500K to $600K income a month. Same time frame for Eureka at $250K to $300K a month. CB said If that was not achieved by end of 2021 then quote “ I’ve not done my job”
3. He also used the phrase ..”Its not (going to be) a death by a thousand lashes” It ended-up taking 20 months after he used that phrase!
On reflection, I may need to review my original Bushranger sale date of Q1 2023 !
“The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see.”
? Winston Churchill
We can thank Covid for some of that...... the kit sat in the Fab shop for months and months as a result
I'm really happy MMP's option to buy manica for 20M has expired!!!!
Everyone's been putting a value of 60M on it from the revenue. Imagine if it was taken off us for 20M. ............
I see the 'The decision to mine' method of triggering the AA agreement a risky hand to play, and one that better suits AA. If AA call our bluff on that then we have to find 20% of development costs. (lets say ~$100e6?!)
I don't think AA, should they be interested, will want any other company having any part of BR but they could certainly make life hard for xtract and we could end up with a real low ball offer.
Despite what Bird says, I don't feel we have 2Mt at Racecource, the grades just haven't matched the .44 av that AA had in their drill campaign . Maybe not the end of the world if we have something worth selling at, say, 1.5Mt, I image there will still be a number of companies will to buy the resource at that sort of magnitude.
The Geo's will know what we have by now, and I imagine they will have a good idea if the current RC resource can be increased in a meaningful way. I just hope Bird doesn't spend $$$ on another round of drilling with little increase in resource.
At some point, if the 2mt is not achievable, he just needs to man up and admit his initial statements were misleading. Let's hope we know where we are before the AGM!
Agree too joeman/bob
If the intent is as stated, to find and drill the shallow high grade component at Ascot, that would show the potential that Ascot could be developed as a second open cut mine.
We know they are looking at both resources as separate entities, I guess that would mean in body as well as from financial viability. To show open pit potential of Ascot would have huge impact on the overall project with the capability to share a single processing plant.
Yes captain.... that was what was said....
Colin said we were to "get our arms" round Ascot because we had to have an idea of what it was in order to sell it ..... but that it wouldn't be "Death by a thousand lashes".
If this has changed for Ascot then it would be good to know that..... and not have to read between the lines....
Colin has said numerous times that we are going for both the 2MT and the decision to mine but I've never read or heard him say that they are co-dependent...... they are separate clauses that each trigger the (one time only) buyback decision.
XTR also pursuing the decision to mine at the same time has 2 main benefits as far as i can see.
1. If we don't make MT we still force the AA clause and either get a sale from AA or get out on the open market.
2. The decision to mine isn't a "got up on the right side of bed" decision..... it will include economics including NPV, so the value of Racecourse will be more transparent. Instead of arguing about whether we can get 1, 2 or 3% of the value of the contained copper, we will be discussing 40, 50, 60% of NPV ...... and that will be worth its weight.... in copper
Lucky, the last RNS specifically stated all results in from Racecourse and so the model can now be finished.....
Doesn't mean we know we have 2MT but I thought that was fairly definitive on drilling.
Somewhere, in one interview, I got impression that once conceptual pit was made, and that plan for further near surface drilling would be included, but that that could be part of the decision to mine package, NOT that we necessarily have to drill it ourselves, it would be on a plate for whoever took it off us?
Did anyone else get this inferrence, but it has been my understanding for a long while?
If 2mtCuEq is declared from the RC model it’s not going to automatically trigger the buy back until Xtract are ready to approach. He did say, they haven’t decided yet wether it will be 2mt or decision to mine to approach AA which would suggest the tonnage will be there. Reaching the threshold is, or was more important to the company leading up to it. Now, if it is in the bag, it’s not as important anymore and the company can concentrate on the final definition work to get the project ready to sell.
Unless of course we find another, another bonanza!
Sorry, couldn’t resist
I don't know how it works but surely we can declare 2mt and keep drilling. They surley can't force us to stop and sell to them!! It's makes absolutely no sense.
If there’s more than 2mt, could you declare 1.9mt by messing around with the cut off at Racecourse, don’t declare Ascot / Footrot and keep on drilling.
Once you finished drilling / happy with everything, revisit the 1.9mt and declare the lot?
Well if more drilling is to come at racecourse and ascot, one can only come to the Coclusion that the latest model will not trigger the buy back clause and therefore will not have 2mt.
Unless there is a way we can declare 2mt can continue drilling???
>>The Phase Two drilling programme has been extremely successful in defining Racecourse and partially identifying Ascot, which remains open ended and relatively untested<<
Would that suggest more exploration to come from Ascot ‘other than’ identifying where the high grade component is and then to follow up with the shallow drilling?
They will more likely than not, embark on the near surface drill programme in a third phase of drilling at the Racecourse deposit, with the intent also, to do the same at Ascot as it was stated in recent podcast they believe there is a high grade component there too. So we know with a degree of certainty, these needed, and so were going to be drilled anyway. So folk shouldn’t be too disappointed if they thought we had all been given a bum steer from CB in that was it, for exploration and a sale was imminent, it would ‘appear’ that he has gone back on his word or was even lying, that is simply not the case. Why take that metallurgy sample from Ascot If they were only going to outline a basic resource with some joined up strike, dip etc? Metallurgy is normally done when mine planning, and to support financial evaluation which is where the higher grade component comes into it.
Whatever, they need to drill at Ascot to locate the crown will still add to increase the overall resource there, let’s not forget that.
I don’t see that any further drilling at Ascot, is a result that RC has ‘not’ come up with the 2mtCuEq, Ascot is too significant for the project that warranted previous, and warrants more drilling. It was said by Jeremy Reid referring to RC, “it was never going to be a question of wether there was enough rock.” We have had, the statement in RNS ‘we have the tonnage and the grades to justify a rework of the conceptual pit.’ We will soon see hopefully where RC sits as an asset. Big hopes for Ascot too.
Good work Andy the only thing I could add is fairly obvious in that, did you consider the different orientation of 28 and 54 ( not drill angle) that would change your cross sections combined and why mineralisation trend does not tally.
Why the queue jumpers? (Should have had 49 + 52 back).
Looks like the labs were pressed to finish off Racecourse first and then complete Footrot / Ascot result afterwards.
Something to prove / prioritise? Given we’re on single drill now, it’s not that causing the sequence issue.
Notice has been served, Racecourse numbers can drop whenever and there was a clear choice to do this.
To be fair, 'imminently' might not have been Birds chosen vocab.
Either way he has to declare near term..
Capt Bob and Howezap
I was also looking at how the high grade and mineralisation has "evolved"
54 was from same location as 28 but this isn't really mentioned in the RNS only in the map and the cross section for 54 surprisingly doesn't build on that for 28 which has been done for some other assays including the Ascot ones today where 45 and 46 built on 44.
I've tried to join together 28 and 54 to visualise it.
Any thoughts ?
combination of 28 and 54
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PZoIpJx_-ohiz7jkT9XrhdU5-S32j1OJ/view?usp=sharing
28 cross section https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/7889G_2-2022-3-31.pdf
54 cross section https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/9509T_4-2022-7-27.pdf
Also surprisingly 53 and 54 don't show combined cross sections yet 53 is only about 100m North of 54 and combined cross section picture was done for 28 and 30 given close proximity.
53 cross section https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/9509T_3-2022-7-27.pdf
Well if everyone here wants to know if the final model is good or bad, you will know by which comes first, the AGM or the model!!
"would anyone care to define 'imminently' , please :-)"
It means by 10 August NtM!
As that calling notice date, is the is last date CB would still be able to hold the AGM in August. Three weeks notice required.
would anyone care to define 'imminently' , please :-)
>>AGM notices will announced imminently - 20 Jul '22
Poster Ref: Prickly
A4444 - he gave the excuse: ' the delay was caused by illness of the accountant who has since recovered.' during a telephone conversation with the BZT 'working group'.
If one assumes he will do All AGM's, as he is not a UK resident, with a few days of each other then it should be soon-ish.
Unless he finds another excuse to delay it!
I’m certain the high grade crown shown there bob is the very same within the current inherited resource going by it’s orientation. But certainly if is decided to increase the high grade parcel to increase recovery to 8years no doubt there is already a viable target area determined.
I think that sounds about right to commence the new conceptual pit model. It is the resource model that had mineralisation guesswork fed into it from core analysis which was referred to as the interp model. It was then updated with the assay data as and when they came in. The conceptual pit will have the financial evaluation to go with it with results from metallurgy test work now being able to be released with the study, now that all assays are back.
The AGM in the next 4 weeks should be interesting (last date to be held with 2 month postponement is end of August).
I think CB will be asked to clarify a few things....... Unless we get the RC model + 2mt before then (stop laughing at the back:))
Thats of course if he doesnt try to delay the AGM past August because he doesnt think that the market conditions are quite right at the moment for an AGM :)