Member Info for andmillsy

Andrew great question on share of gold production.

Note that for Q2, Q3 and Q4 share of production can be reconciled plugging in 28% of alluvials and 24% of hard rock although I would have perhaps expected 26% of hard rock from initial recall of RNSs for hard rock agreement.

So why is Q1 different? I think 24% (26%) hard rock is wrong and not aligned with the RNS for Guy Fawkes or Boa. It seems to me that in Q3 and Q4 the results may have overlooked 35% attributable to MMP.

Extract from RNS for GF

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/manica-gold-hard-rock-mining-contractor-agreement-d96j192dh5meval.html

"Guy Fawkes Agreement provides for Explorator to receive 20% of gold production (after settlement by Explorator of the Mining Production Tax)
· Explorator will remit 35% of its share of Guy Fawkes gold production (after applicable expenses and tax) to Mutapa Mining and Processing LDA, Explorator's existing hard rock collaboration partner
In consideration for the appointment, the Contract Miner will retain 74% in gold for services provided, and Explorator will retain 26% of all gold production, amounting to 20% after payment by Explorator of the applicable Mining Production Tax of 6%.
After deduction of applicable expenses and costs and tax incurred by Explorator, Xtract has agreed with MMP to split the net cash flow 65% in Explorator's favour (with 35% due to MMP)."

So I think we need to work on 65% of 26% muddied a bit by deduction of attributable expenses. So more like 17%.

BOA is similar but with complications mentioned by Iceberg on recovery of upfront costs.

I think the overstatement in Q3 and Q4 may be corrected in Q1 figures by about 48oz (difference between 24% and 17%)

In Q1 sticking with 28% on 1370 for gold alluvials gives 383.6oz so hardrock share of production was 41.4oz to give declared 425oz in total.

Adding back my assumed correction of 48oz from prior periods gives an "unadjusted" share of hard rock production of 89.4oz (41.4+48) which is 11.1% of hardrock production still light but may be explained by Boa and my assumption of 17% being too high.

I'd love to hear James view on this.

It really feels to me that the format of the quarterly gold report is no longer fit for purpose. Various agreements need to be separate line items with transparency of calculation and also a view of stock of gold not yet sold and this needs to be addressed before FB comes into the mix.

Btw all this may just explain the delay in reporting pretty decent results.

In order to try and understand the opportunity for near surface potential at Racecourse I found the following cross sections helpful when viewed in conjunction with the latest drill location plan.
I've put it together into one slide to show the near surface potential particularly in the South of Racecourse. Looks to me like there is significant near surface potential.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1K0xHXM5tYpq5nck6A4A-VIiRewhgbBaU/view?usp=sharing
I should remind everyone the trucks are not to scale :)

Note the hole 24 cross section contains the cross section of hole 36 - you might remember me moaning about the outstanding assays for this one where the drill observations were provided on 17 Dec 2021. This hole looks very interesting.
***** COLIN HAS QUINTON CHECKED THE BOOT OF HIS CAR FOR THE 36 ASSAYS ???? *****

If anyone wants to look at the details from the relevant RNS which I've cherry picked they are below.
1. Latest Drill Location Plan
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/1316N_1-2022-5-27.pdf
2. Holes 18 and 20
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/3380B_2-2022-2-10.pdf
3. Holes 28 and 30
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/7889G_2-2022-3-31.pdf
4. Hole 20
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/3659F_2-2022-3-20.pdf
5. Holes 10 and 21
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/7492D_4-2022-3-4.pdf
6. Hole 24
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/7492D_2-2022-3-4.pdf

Some thoughts I scribbled down after the interview on the topic of dimension - I have kind of reverse engineered what 2mt would like
To get to 2mt copper then XTR need copper ore as an example of 600mt@0.333.
600mt of ore equates to a volume of ore of c260million cubic metres using copper ore on this tool https://www.aqua-calc.com/calculate/volume-to-weight

What does this volume look like?

Some examples
1. Rectangular cuboid: 1500m x 500m x 333m length, width, depth
2. Cigar 1500m x 470m diameter length x pi x r squared
3. Trapezoidal prism a flattened Toblerone 1500m x 370m high  with width at top 600m and at base 350m (https://www.math.net/calculators/trapezoidal-prism-volume)

Ant somehow I missed Andre and wasn't aware of it being discussed by Colin. I'll have to look into it further.
I've been informed that Cleantech (Lebanese) are partners of MMP but I'll need to look into this to corroborate it.
Cheers

Great find Ant
Some of those old workings have intriguing names. I particularly liked
Two Fools,
Birthday Gift,
Donkey and
Laugh

Gixxer I think you're correct about own processing equipment for other deposits.
"Currently, FB plant is designed to handle only oxides, Chinese partnering with Explorator on Sulphide prospects are likely using cyanidation on a very modest scale to treat their ore."

Could be the case Joeman.
One assay result I'm waiting on for Racecourse is hole 36. Sounded positive on the geo observations back in Dec. It would also add quite a bit to RC in the South.
If it was poor I think it would have been released with the rag tag waifs and strays assays RNS we had recently.

****Colin if you're reading this can you ask Quinton to see if it's dropped down the back of his desk***,*

"Drill hole BRDD-21-036 tested the southern end of the Racecourse Inferred Mineral Resource, intersecting zones of alteration and variable strength visible copper mineralisation from 11m depth to end of hole at 618m, with stronger mineralisation from 11m-216m depth"
"Drill hole BRDD-21-036 confirmed the southern continuity of the Racecourse mineralisation, again with a significant interval of stronger mineralisation, which supports our prognosis that the southern extension progresses well beyond the southern end of the conceptual open pit."

Hi Ben
It's been niggling me too.
I asked a few weeks back and got a response below from Xtract. I think Colin had discussed it at the AGM with some attendees, unfortunately I wasn't at that meeting. I didn't ask about the magnitude of the income but would expect it to be in the segment analysis in the upcoming 2021 annual report.

Question
It would be much appreciated if you can provide any more detail about the copper income, which in recent interviews sounded like it was, from "Chongwe" but it is not clear which Xtract asset this relates to as Chongwe is not on the Xtract website or mentioned in the 2020 annual statement. Grateful if you can provide clarity on this point?

Response
Copper income from Chongwe will continue and we hope will last at least another year. Chongwe was an opportunity where a small project owner asked the company to assist and understand what he had and where we might share benefit if there was any potential. It was more exploratory than a deal, but our findings are fairly positive, which if confirmed, will take us into an ongoing definitive arrangement, which of course will be announced.

I had a look around DIGS, thanks @Ella10, for the link and came across some of the older information relating to Footrot.
The most recent report which I can access is from 2008/9. Although annual reports are produced after this they are confidential so I can't access them :(

A quote from the drill plan from 2008/9 "Two Lachlan Star holes are interesting because they appear to have intersected the same copper anomaly. The top of FT003 appears to have intersected the same mineralised section as the base of FT005. There is an offset in between the two along a NE trending fault, however Cu mineralisation extends along strike for 1500m with a 350ppm Cutoff. This system could continue extensively to depth and be mineable from surface, making it an excellent low to mid grade target with the possibility of much higher grade at depth and structural intersections. "

There has been drilling done since then including I think one diamond drill in 2014 by Anglo which is referenced in the Xtact presentation about Bushranger on their website "A drill hole in 2014 hit porphyritic monzonite-monzodiorite intrusives overprinted by propylitic to phyllic alteration in this area that needs to be followed up". Please don't ask me what the terms mean !

Link to the whole document from 2008/9 is here and Footrot from page 9.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yyzOTs7KQRIgEhSxWdYaBjv1pzdPw5ft/view?usp=drivesdk

Hi Lucky
Here's the legislation for exploration activities relating to this.
https://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/_regional/meg/community/land-access-and-arbitration/exploration-licences-and-regulation#:~:text=An%20exploration%20licence%20gives%20the%20licence%20holder%20the%20exclusive%20right,production%20lease%20will%20be%20granted.

I don't know if Xtract need to submit a drill plan in advance of drilling in new area eg Footrot I think this will be controlled by the licence conditions for EL5574 which I don't have. Conditions related to rehabilitation in the legislation will, I assume, encourage reuse of drill pads.

Recent approvals for holes 44, 45 and 46 on plot 93 and hole 49 on plot 97 took many weeks to be granted and iny opinion caused at least some delay in the recent drill program. The reasons for the delay were explained to me in the email below which I received from the TMS analyst in NSW.

I'm going to drop an email to my contact in TMS to see if there are any other restricted plots in EL5574 and if I get a response I'll see if I can figure out if they're close to Footrot.

?==========

Email from TMS - EAO71 was most recent approval:
EAO71 was a Minister’s Consent approval to prospect in an exempted area (specifically Lots 93 & 97 in DP 757022 within the Vulcan State Forest) in accordance with section 30 of the Mining Act 1992 (hereunder).

30 Exempted areas
(1) The holder of an exploration licence may not, except with the consent of the Minister, exercise any of the rights conferred by the licence within land in an exempted area.
(2) Such consent may be given either unconditionally or subject to conditions.
(3) Clauses 12 and 14 of Schedule 1B apply to the variation or suspension of a condition of consent granted under this section in the same way as they apply to the variation or suspension of a condition of an authorisation.
Exempted areas are defined as:
Exempted area means an area constituted by land—
(a) reserved, dedicated, appropriated, resumed or acquired for public purposes (except land reserved for a temporary common or a commonage), whether vested in the Crown or in any person as trustee for public purposes, or
(b) held under a lease for water supply by virtue of a special lease or otherwise, or
(c) transferred, granted or vested in trust by the Crown for the purpose of a race-course, cricket-ground, recreation reserve, park or permanent common or for any other public purpose, or
(d) prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this definition.

Lucky approvals are required if there are restrictions within a specific plot on the licence. I don't see any further restricted plots but wondered if you had any specifics.

Lucku520
I can't find the restrictions you are referring to in your approvals lead time.
It may be my oversight but there doesn't appear to be any water or other restrictions on TMS. If you have any plot numbers where restrictions apply please let me know and I'll check on TMS for approval but I think we may be in the clear.
I think this is a short sharp drill effort over next few weeks.
Cheers

Sorry this is a bit long and rambling...

It's an older interview pre Ascot (officially being announced)l and it's an interview not an RNS but I found this to be one of the better structured interviews.
https://www.vox markets.co.uk/articles/traders-cafe-with-zak-mir-colin-bird-executive-chairman-galileo-resources-0769c02/
Please remove the space between vox and markets

500mt and 2mt discussed.
Comparison with other Australian major projects discussed and it's 6months ago.

In the recent interview I think 20 x 20 was an unfortunate off the cuff statement, I
it unsettled me and I wish I had been doing the interview to challenge this.

Decision to mine though is perhaps taking greater prominence and perhaps questions the 2mt trigger from racecourse alone (which likely requires at least c600mt ore imho). Pursuing decision to mine is supported by the suggested shallow drill program. However this should be quick and not expensive for example RC undertaken at BODA and this could be make a significant difference to mine economics NPV.

Colin states in the recent interview that both 2mt and decision to mine are still in play.

Yes, it's a statement in an interview and not an RNS but perhaps that's where the investment timing opportunity lies but it depends on your confidence and trust.

I don't think we have the info to conclude the dimensions and calculate ore, stripping ratio and grade but of course we want to make our own assumptions to determine whether to buy or sell.

Worth reflecting that at BR we had a surprise; firstly we found Ascot, initially it was assumed to be Racecourse like, " doesn't take a Harvard graduate to see it's the same..." but recent holes tell us it's different, recent interview says it's different, cross section maps show vertical gold shoots. I think we should drill try to see what's the feed below. We should also explore Footrot and not just gives it away.

The geos in Oz here have proven themselves for me eg finding Ascot and I don't think they're asking for much time to define it a little further a statement on timeline and ideally budget would be reassuring but I personally don't think Colin has switched to "raise mode".

We can expect FairBride announcement this month. We can expect alluvials and copper income from Africa, we have interesting assays inbound I'm particularly interested in 49.
Because I have determined in my opinion that Colin is acting in shareholders interests on Wednesday I bought more at the close at 4.8p.

10p has been a much discussed figure in the past.
Might be worth listening to the reaction to 10p in this interview which discusses XTR from 10 min and from 14m30 the 10p figure.
https://www.**********.co.uk/articles/traders-cafe-with-zak-mir-colin-bird-executive-chairman-galileo-resources-0769c02/
Also worth bearing in mind the option strike price for employees and contractors was set at 10p.

Worth a look at the MCAP at the aforementioned ticker.
Perhaps it has some headroom now but the story there is an astonishing one of destruction of shareholder value driven by a reckless board who embraced death spiral CLNs, failed to close out the CLNs to prevent further shareholder dilution recently from unexpected warrant conversion, went on a crazy half baked Zimbabwean diamond mine purchase only to bail after unknown cost and management distraction.
So what did this mean for shareholder value...

In May 2021 they had share consolidation 1:100 after which there were 213,004,895 shares in issue per RNS with share price of 10p post consol so a company with MCAP of £21.3M.
Step forward a year - MCAP c£7M and shares in issue a jaw dropping 1,002,311,163 - yes that's not a typo.

If anyone fancies a bit of sport there's an investor conference over there on 6 June. Could be an opportunity to chuck in a few curved balls in the q&a.

Screenlearner I am in a very different place to you. I have made sure not to be wearing my rose tinted spectacles and re-read several times.
I am very pleased to see the importance of 35 reitereated.
There are some small errors as mentioned by other posters in the RNS and hole 52 whilst mentioned in the RNS isn't on the attached map but for me this is an extremely positive update.
I suspect the RNS may have been rushed out due to Colin's surprise on reading the mixed response here over the weekend after the 39 assay RNS.

"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."

Interesting reminder Screenlearner - thanks
I'm hoping for weeks not longer given other comments in interviews from CB

I've been away the last few days so only followed a bit of the discussion about the gold assay results for 39. We should also remember the results of 35 into Ascot. This was the hole where they fast tracked the assays and it showed decent copper. Interesting the difference versus 39. Would like to hear an interview to get some thoughts on this.

Andrew is it not the case that there is still a delay of 2 months permitted due to Coronavirus as this accounting period ends 31 December 2021 and the temporary relief applies to accounting periods ending prior to 28 June 2022 ?

I am referring to this statement from the FCA
https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/delaying-annual-company-accounts-and-half-yearly-financial-reports-for-listed-companies-coronavirus-qa

I note that another of Colin's companies delayed publication, African Pioneer, this was RNS'd,, but perhaps that was because it was main market.
"Publication date for Accounts for the year ended 31 December 2021: Due to the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic the Company is utilising the temporary relief measures implemented by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Financial Reporting Council which continue to apply to issuers with reporting periods ending before 28 June 2022. Accordingly, the Company is deferring the publication of its annual financial report for the year ended 31 December 2021 for the permitted time extension of two months and plans to announce its final results by 30 June 2022."

Anyway I am hoping it is by end of June, as long as I am in country I would try to attend.

Hi Screenlearner. Useful extracts thanks.

I interpret holes 47 and 48 from newly approved drill pads and given their location I believe it provides confirmation that (at least some) MIMDAS data has been used to locate the pads which is supported by the statement from 2 Mar RNS "Racecourse porphyry swings towards a southerly strike direction as it moves towards the south and follow-up holes will be collared from drill pads located further to the west, for which approval is expected shortly from the NSW authorities"
Link to my interpretation of the old geophysical information and previously approved drill pads.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dQ0tBW6BXm4VUFG6GS-tDehC4rGrviYU/view?usp=sharing
Clearly it will be great to get the geo obs to provide a level of confirmation about the hypothesis of direction of the Racecourse Porphyry swinging to a Southerly strike

At Ascot I'm very keen to see the geo observations for 49, 50 and 51. Either of 50 or 51 appeared to go at a steep angle and quite deep - I would guess 51 guided by 50.

Sorry for repost - phone did some mad predictive texting updates...

Great info and discussion on Kiwara.
My understanding - Kiwara was a company sale and with several assets this was a takeover and necessitated a change in shareholder ownership and therefore suspension of trading or at least a lot of control around the trading - recently I've experienced this with Vivo Energy and Vectura.
This transaction may be different. I'm assuming it would be a sale off the BR licence EL5574 or alternatively a sale of Prospectore and its 4 licences (less favourable imho)
Other possibilities are feasible as others have mentioned in the chat. If it is one of my two suggested scenarios then I'm not clear if we would have a suspension as Xtract would not be subject to a takeover.

Iwantthatone - I saw you post after my post. I guess that puts me firmlyin the asset sale camp rather than a conspiracy theorist. I can't see another company wanting the complexity of the Moz gold JVs even though I do see them as being worth several pence of our share price and a solid, relatively derisked, revenue stream and with start up a matter of weeks not months away.
Hopefully we're closer to finding out...