Adrian Hargrave, CEO of SEEEN, explains how the new funds will accelerate customer growth Watch the video 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.
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.
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.
Can anyone on here tell me how the AA buy back clause works?
no
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 ?
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.
Hahaha I forgot I put that here this morning.
Wow, I thought it was this morning! Mental clocks wrong. Maybe that's what Colin is suffering from.
LOL thats mean :)