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.
Hi Ella, pretty sure all of CB interviews happened pre gold discovery at Ascot?
I don’t think Ascot needs drilling to death, but it needs another couple of months (or more) to get a better understanding of what could be down there ie prove there’s some cathedral spires with a cathedral (or at least a big porphyry church) attached.
I get it’s a fine balancing act, at the moment I’d be weighing in on the more to explore side - and with that ideally pushing warrants (or serious Manica income) to avoid raise!
And on that point, all credit to Xtract team for getting this far on the budget they had, well over my expectations.
SQ52,
Some time ago I suggested that we may just get an exploration target declared for Ascot. There was some discussion on this board about that possibility. CB had obviously been reading the discussion as he discussed the confidence level of a resource at Ascot in his next interview. I believe he stated Ascot would have an inferred resource. I realise some of the detail from interviews require a pinch or two of salt but this appeared to be a specific response to the discussion that had taken place.
I think you are close lucky. I think with interim they will want to show they are nearly at 2MT with some assays outstanding.... that way they can bolster the share price ahead of negotiations, allow Manica Revenue to kick in and demonstrably support the company position but give themselves another month of Ascot drilling (because as soon as the 2MT or decision to mine is declared we are buckled in and there's no brakes on this roller coaster).
Either way I'm looking forward to getting something a bit more technical from the company.
I’m with you on that Howzap, push for warrants to pay for further Ascot drilling, can’t leave that lose end unexplored before sale.
I think CB has given up trying to convince the market into believing he’s got 2mt. Clearly need some hard numbers.
Above 2mt and we’ll see announcement before Manica announcement. Below 2mt and we’ll see announcement after Manica announcement.
All could be interim and not fully declared JORC compliant for independent analysis (hope he’s taken legal advise on that!)
I’m hoping we get an interim interview with gold cathedrals tomorrow, the spires are looking promising. Another thought, if gold goes up the deeper it goes, what sort of gold values will be below the 15g per tonne drill!
I see that Andrew and my thought is the reworked conceptual pit would be summarised along with resource models from RC and Ascot. It is an ideal marketing opportunity for a last push potentially toward them 8p warrants as suggested. Particularly if to announce that modelling shows 2mt has been reached! That would be a material change in the project followed up by a webinar for visual representation.
Reading yesterday's the RNS again, I wonder if there is some confusion with the terminology that CB used??
We have been lead to believe that "The Racecourse conceptual open pit model" will be competed by end of May or about 1 month later (end June/early July)
But in the RNS CB said we would shortly have a "interim summary of the Racecourse and Ascot prospects."
The model was specific to RC so could these be two things (summary and model) be two completely different things and that some are assuming they are the same think or one replaces the other?
I've read some posters call the interim summary an interim model. But that is not what it is according to the RNS.
As they could be two different things giving different info, we may still get the RC (only) open pit model by end of June AND the interim summary soon covering RC AND Ascot.
Just a thought...or am I clutching at straws :)
Whilst personally I think we may be a little away from 2Mt at the moment I feel pretty sure we must be at something like 1.3Mt minimum. CB has often said we're looking at 500, 600Mt of ore or higher. If we take lowish grades of 0.25% then even at the lowest end we'd be at 1.25Mt, and perhaps more realistically we'd be at 1.5Mt+. Communication of that right now, backed up by an interim model, would allow CB to open meaningful discussions with AA, a) in the hope/expectation that 2Mt will be forthcoming in due course and b) because even if it isn't, that seems a great resource that most majors would be willing to pay for. The interim model may also set a new, higher base level for the share price, possibly after a slight retrace before the market finally realises the value here. That could also help trigger the 8p warrants to pay for further drilling.
"Is it that they have missed the 2mt target and want ascot to get us to the line or is the delay tactic to prove up more of ascot?"
IMHO This distils the debate.
One view is very worrying and challenges CBs credibility after all his comments re 2MT - and the other is very positive and delays things so the news is even better when it comes.
Which view is correct should become clearer in the next 6- 8 weeks.
btw. On reflection although I said that sp will tank if we have missed the 2mt, that may happen in the short term, but the African assets esp FB should support a SP of 5p to 6p on their own so IF we have failed to hit 2mt the sp should go back up to circa 6p as FB income ramps up.
IMHO this shows that the risk here is minimal as nothing / very little, is priced in re Bushranger.
That said, I would be very disappointed and believe CB would have mislead shareholders if we didnt get a buy-out at some point of 15p, absolute minimum, after all CBs "superlatives" over the last 12 months.
Good luck John Swan. I hope your right. If it had have been you. I would not have had a problem with it. People should be trying to get their cost average down. I reached my target last week. No share is a 100% certainty. I have traded xtract, across the last 16 months. I have always held my main hand though. And traded with a certain amount when I thought it topped and bottomed. If you read my post from Wednesday when you bought I said this should be the bottom now news dependent. The bottom was always going to be at 3 on the big drop last year. You bought on Wednesday at an excellent time. I was waiting for the next news. If it was negative I would have bought again at 3.7p, and if possible 3.5p. Because I know It will double from there within a few months, so I would have sold half of what I bought at 7p and 7.4p. I believe in xtract but sometimes factors outside can cause a crash. So better to be safe than sorry. I think fair value for this share at this moment in time is somewhere between 6p and 7p. Possibly 8p at a push. People's doubts about CB stop this being a 10p share yet. I don't know enough about CB to understand there issues. But it definitely impacts the share price.
philtered1 - I did notice the approx 1M sold today, but that was not me. I have millions of XTR shares (including an aggregate 1M purchase at 4.7p this week) and to date have not sold any. If that changes I’ll let you know. Still holding out for Colin to generate a seven figure profit on my shares, though I suspect stated timelines have not been anyway realistic and that CB has probably been overly optimistic and premature about the 2MT target no longer being a nail biter following the discovery of Ascot.
Well..... I agree, there seems to be delay tactics.
Is it that they have missed the 2mt target and want ascot to get us to the line or is the delay tactic to prove up more of ascot?
I think the team are delaying declaring 2mt so ascot can get proved up to make a good contribution to the sale price.
I am hoping the interim results show we're very close to the 2mt at rc and still open in some directions.
We then spend time on ascot to prove it up.
If the interim results show over 2mt then they have to activate the buy back clause! (Not happing)
If the interim results show we're miles away from the 2mt then the sp tanks.
So...... what are the interim results for?
I actually don't know but I get the feeling it's another carrot for us long term holders. This time the carrots upright and not sideways lol
Apologies in advance for being pedantic hamsters, but I can’t help pointing out the project in itself is called ‘The Bushranger Copper Gold Project’ :-\
But yes RC has more copper, it was suggested by CB there can be advantages to this with easier recoveries from separation when processing. The met test work results will be known so hopefully will have comment on in the summary.
Further met test work was planned for Ascot to understand optimum processing. This paragraph would suggest the gold and copper could be very easy and cheaper to process.
>> Modelling is advancing at a pace, and to this end, we are modelling with a specific intent to identify copper and gold mineralisation trends and their spatial significance, designed to maximise opportunities and identify areas which could have material effect on the model.
I think someone bought a lot of shares earlier this week then sold them today at a 10+% profit. About £5k profit. Then had a little dig at the company. It was a bird but not CB. Got to hand to him though a good profit for a couple of days work.
Thing to remember is this is primarily a copper dig, so gold was possibly never in the thinking. That said, the fact that they are now finding gold at increasing levels as they pan out, might be nuts to ignore, certainly worth a few more holes at least?
My view, FWIW - RC isn’t closed off to the south so it’ll be a while before a final model could be delivered. Ascot needs a whole heap of extra drilling to understand it. I don’t believe we have 2Mt in RC (grades a bit low for that, and I’m not convinced CB has ever said with certainty that we will reach it) but it should still be sizeable. 2Mt might be reached from further extension to the south but I suspect Ascot will be needed. Given the way Ascot seems to be shaping up (vertical gold-rich structures) then it’s quite a different kettle of fish to RC. Complexity is not ideal. But what do I know? This is just my simple sense of things at the moment.
Flipper- no one except Colin can be sure as we PIs haven't been party to the contract.
A reworked conceptual pit may be subject of a new webinar presentation.
Agree iceberg that is my understanding
RC resource model has been continually updated as assays have come back. Converting what was an interp model from the core analysis to one with grades included.
The conceptual pit model was up until the point of the last but one RNS still the same conceptual pit released many months ago.
>> Modelling continues at the project, with the Racecourse prospect indicating that it has grades and tonnes justifying a rework of the conceptual open pit."<<
Wether that modelling at RC shows 2mt has potentially been reached we will see. Seems quite possible as why would they feel the need to rework the conceptual pit around a sub 2mt resource model ready for this interim summary.
This summary when released is screaming out for an interview! An explosive one at that.
That's one interpretation, but I think he's focused on giving the data he needs to Anglo. i.e this is interim because it would only contain the RC data and not the data from Ascot and porphyry 3 and 4.
The lining up of the gold is really interesting if you look at the diagram of 38 and 39 combined.
It has a small sector of gold at .4gt, then 200-250m extending downing and widening to the 39 data to 14m 1.9gt 30m at .1 that's massively increasing and widening.
Imagine if - off the back of these results they drill down the throat of the new gold intrusion and we get 400-600m of gold starting at .4 at 300m depth, increase to say 4 or 5gt at 800-900m. I think thats what Colin is hinting at.
'It will be interim simply because the are still processing drills.' - Not much more to process in terms of RC drill results though surely? ( Unless they plan on another drill programme in that region. )
I imagine they would be consistently update the model as they go along, they are not going to hold off until all data is complete.
To me, the term 'interim' means there is still major work required to gather and complete which does not add up. As I mentioned, why release an unfinished model if the final one is only a couple of months off?
The model work will be very very different to the model last year. Last's model made no alteration to any of the geology, it was essentially a simple economic model with a bit of basic pit design. All of the Geo work was based on the JORC.
This model is trying to map and plan grades, intrusions shapes etc, all without probably (i am not sure) a new JORC.
On top of that they will be feeding in metallurgy and recovery rates. It will be to a higher confidence level imo.
They will of course keep a running simple model as the assays come in, but this is probably a level or 2 more advanced.
It will be interim simply because the are still processing drills.
The final model and JORC will inc Ascot in some way.
I always thought that may-June was relatively optimistic, with end of may - beginning of june, being possible.
'Agreed. But for this timescale he was unusually unequivocal and absolute, not like the others with his "hopeful", trying to, want to etc'
That's a fair comment, we shall see.
I do note he used the term " 'hopefully' a major new pit" when referring to RC in his recent JLP interview.
"You've been here as long as I have so you know all the 'tales' as well as I do"
Agreed. But for this timescale he was unusually unequivocal and absolute, not like the others with his "hopeful", trying to, want to etc
I am going to wheel out my one liner again, and say "I dont think CB would be such an idiot" and give such an unequivocal timescale and also state in public that we definitely will get 2mt (as you and others can testify to) and then not deliver.
Being overly optimistic is one thing, being a charlatan is another.
If I am wrong and being naive, then I doubt many will believe anything CB says ever again and I think the SP will tank imho.
That said, I think he will deliver as promised.
I hope I am wrong Andrew, You've been here as long as I have so you know all the 'tales' as well as I do.
I mean even in terms of building the model the timelines don't feel right - I have years of experience building 3D mathematical/Engineering models so I have a good understanding of what it takes. The software package they used didn't look unfamiliar to me. Why are they suddenly reworking it, why are they releasing only an interim model when, the bulk of, RC data has not changed in some time? The dill holes haven't moved, the grades haven't changed.
Yes, some revision in terms of optimising the open pit size placement of mine plant but his is usually quick work when a model is mature. It looked fairly mature back when we saw the model some time ago. Obviously my experience is not in mining modelling but something ain't adding up!
Xeiger - wouldn't an RNS saying we have the 2 mt trigger the AA clause ?