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.
Whilst having s listen back over early phase 2 podcasts it’s a good way to gauge Colin’s optimism back from then, against the realities of what or where the project sits at present in terms of the geology. Way back in July ‘21 before Ascot was identified as a separate porphyry, at the time the geophys pointed to it being the other side to the saddle of racecourse. Potentially to join up with RC to make one big open pit. Now thankfully IMO with what we now know, it turned out to be separate and were able delineate and close off the southern extremities of the open pit, otherwise they could still be drilling it now! Nether the less, way back then he was dreaming of a large open pit of 20mt over 20 years at 0.3-0.35CuEq.
I does just show that grades from RC that are perceived as being below expectations. Where in fact perfectly within their expectations to be quoting that copper equivalent.
So I think not only will he have his dream come true, phase 2 has clearly been successful too, in demonstrating a multi porphyry system beyond Colin’s optimistic view and exceeding companies expectations.
Ironically he made this comment too, “Who wants to back a chief executive that’s not optimistic?”
It’s a really good old podcast in understanding where it sits now and why.
Insert v o x m a r k e t s
www.**********.co.uk/articles/traders-cafe-with-zak-mir-colin-bird-executive-chairman-xtract-resources-ac8863c/executive-chairman-xtract-resources
Howezap. I am a LTH and have been here since well before the bushranger days. My concern,a s with others is that,
1. What is the likelihood of the resource estimates being announced before the New Year or even shortly afterwards given the repeated failures to meet timescales that CB is known for ?
2. If delivered, what is the likelihood of them showing either 2mt or a viable mine ? The mood music has well and truly shifted from their being 2mt to now a 'decision to mine. '
I believed CB, simple as that, and I do hope not to be let down here.
Hi eastern investor, where timescales are concerned, they are too subjective to make an informed comment to be fair at this time.
What we do know though, from what Colin has said, is that hey have had a RC resource model since about April / may that was being updated with results as they came in so with the very last hole into RC, hole 54 with assays reported on 27 July. Conceptual study to follow, that is outsourced including new pit design/plan. But potentially could be just an updated conceptual model, but nether the less, still independently compiled. So it would be fair to say RC and its supporting conceptual model has already been completed and by now, Ascot MRE too. There is a very good chance the process has been started already to determine AA’s intent.
The perception that the decision to mine is the lesser of the two options to trigger the buy back is wrong IMO. To have gained a greater geological understanding of the whole deposit outweighs just a specific contained copper value.
On top of that , there is far greater value in proving that a resource of ‘X’ will be potentially, economically recoverable ‘toward’ its viability as a mine, than alternatively showing a resource of ‘X’ with its contained copper/gold equivalent value.
Eastern
>>>If delivered, what is the likelihood of them showing either 2mt or a viable mine ?
This is another example of comparing the ‘potential’ reality of where the resource now sits at RC ( estimated 500mt @ +\- 0.3CuEq) to what the target was to add to the already positive result of the original financial model.
Particularly what Jeremy Reid explains at the beginning to understand this and to realise the potential of what reaching this objective means now for the updated financial model in view of his comments on how the original pit model of the 71mt JORC resource would already pay for infrastructure and plant etc.
https://youtu.be/AEIwR_0S7SE
"Anglo American (OTCQX:AAUKF) (OTCQX:NGLOY) reported Thursday that Q3 production was broadly flat from a year ago, as lower copper output offset a ramp up in coal operations and a strong performance at its De Beers diamond unit.
Anglo (OTCQX:AAUKF) (OTCQX:NGLOY) said Q3 copper production fell 6% Y/Y to 147K metric tons, citing planned lower grades at its operations in Chile and unfavorable ore characteristics at Los Bronces, partly offset by first production of copper from the Quellaveco project in Peru."
Howezap, thank you for this detailed response and I see the logic behind a declaration to mine as opposed to a simple declaration of tonnage.
If CB is correct then the current SP is incredibly under-valued. We now are in the hands of his timescales, this is where we have the problem. On another note, talking about full production and Africa, I wonder when we will get the Q3 results which should show a satisfactory increase in production as the plant moved towards full operation.
The reality is- this wont be going anywhere. CB ramped this up very hard but has run out of rope to pull now.
Have a look at each of his companies and each project within each company- and you will see that most turn into blind ends. But on the journey- he still drains a salary every year. Ramp, change projects--->rinse and repeat
-----------------
Colin Bird’s AIM record, as of November 22:
Time he became CEO of BZT- SP 0.5….now 0.06
Time he became CEO of XTR- SP 10...now 3.1
Time he became CEO of Galileo 7.38...now 1.4
£XXXXXXX paid out in salaries to Colin Bird from these companies during the times
Arguably the BR project is much higher profile than historic projects/deals that have failed to deliver. Surely if the agenda here was to ramp this very hard with no likelihood of delivering shareholder value, then that would be Colin's reputation trashed? Maybe he sees something like AFP to be his main bet such that XTR is not as important to him as it is to XTR shareholders? He only needs one from his stable to hit the jackpot which could minimise disappointments elsewhere.
Does he think like this ? Possibly with smaller projects/deals... but I hope that BR is too high a profile for that to be the case.
"Surely if the agenda here was to ramp this very hard with no likelihood of delivering shareholder value, then that would be Colin's reputation trashed?"
I'm holding on to that view too. CB is a lot of things but I don't think he is an idiot.
The superlatives have been recent ("we have a tier one asset" ), and he must know by now what we really have.
"and he must know by now what we really have"
if that is the case PLEASE publish it. Who benefits by him keeping known evidence from us and the market?
I'm thinking 'Kwakers' isn't expecting an invite to CB's 79th Birthday party ?
Meanwhile, back at the fort, I continue my slow adding shares back exercise to my - now modest- holding here.. a chance this goes under 3p, I get...hence the 'slowly' adding back... but anywhere around the 3p ball park feels like a good buying opportunity to me here and now ..
IMHO & DYOR
Andrew >>> The superlatives have been recent ("we have a tier one asset" ), and he must know by now what we really have <<<
A good point, with the earlier 2mt predictions, they were no doubt more speculative without ‘all’ the assay data that wasn’t available at them times. But his very recent statements about a resource at RC of 20x25mtpa (tier 1) are a lot more easily determined and would simply be a direct lie if shown later that the resource was far shorter than 500mt.
Wether 2mt was going to come from RC alone has always been contentious. Colin has not directly said “we will get the 2mt from RC” but, he thinks that…….
I have shown a podcast of cb from july21 dreaming of a resource of 20x20mtpa at copper Eq’s of 0.3-0.35 which clearly shows he had realistic expectations that 2mtCu from RC alone were not in his mind. The early geophys at the time pointed to the extension of RC going all the way down 3km’s and could well have seen 2mt coming from an extended RC. But as we now know that potential extension became Ascot and other out and underlying gold systems.