Member Info for Andrew4444

£50K buy gone through so someones confident !

Long and informative IC article

Massive short supply of Copper and nickle coming

EV revolution will not happen unless production increases (not just price increase)

Rio Tinto boss. "The problem is those perfect projects – cheap, large scale, in a friendly jurisdiction – aren't out there."

(Colin Bird may be able to help you there)

https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/news/2022/04/13/awash-with-cash/

SP may well start to climb as more news is due but looking at timescales (Mine not CBs) for all the assets I think mid to end of July should be when we get a substantial rerate or spike up.

1. Q2 alluvial results should be out and should be best ever with GF progress and good weather for that quarter.
2. FB should have been up and running for at least a month and first income should be declared by end July.
3. Possibly some income declared from Eureka or at least news of progress for very near term income bu July.
4. Obliviously the most substantial one - 2mt should be declared. I'm taking CBs April / May, June latest time scale as being late July :)

Hopefully I'm wrong and it all happens a little sooner. I doubt is though.

We'll see.

Last two quarters, details were released 18 Jan and 14 Oct. So chance we will get RNS tomorrow (14th). If not , then Tuesday 19 th (after BH) looks highly likely.. that's.assuming results are at least decent and don't need to be "delayed".

"I don’t follow his logic of reducing his back of a fag packet valuation which was originally based on possibility of 2MT of contained copper "

Agreed. In his original article the main driver was reaching 2mt. Very strange to change the criteria.

POC has gone up substantially since his article. Not too sure if I agree with his 3% buy-out figure but even at half that % the buy-out must be much more than twice current market value.

First article Jan 2021
https://masterinvestor.co.uk/equities/johns-mining-journal-where-next-for-xtract-resources/

Howezap

Thanks for your thoughts

You could well be right that 2mt can be declared before all directions closed off. The RNS comment could be interpreted that we need to wait until completion. May be wrongly.

On balance, I agree with you and think its more likely that we dont need to wait but that RNS comment did put some doubt in my mind.

I agree and understand that AScot will / should keep increasing after 2mt declared - whenever that is.

I agree that it could be seen that there are two separate projects / objectives working simultaneously and independently : reach 2mt / decision to mine and secondly try and define Ascot more which is separate to the open pit model.

However, what I don’t understand is can we declare the 2mt / decision to mine BEFORE the open pit study is complete from current data being received and before final completion?.

This was in the recent RNS

"The modelling will require the conceptual open pit to be closed off in ALL directions in order to ensure that infrastructure or tailings dams are not incorrectly positioned over what is a continuing ore body."

So does that mean no declaration of 2mt / decision to mine until model done and ALL closed off, or can we make declaration before that?

If we have to wait until all closed off before making any declaration of size then the timescales will be driven by results.

"Just ignore dates given now, it's much better for your mental health"

There speaks the voice of an LTH :) Cant agree more Lucky

I've seen a a few posts over the last few months saying CB has now given a clear pathway on timescales and targets yet many still question him. That's because hes done the same thing many times over the last 5 years and failed on every timescale ! (for whatever reason)

I'm expecting it to end very, very well for all shareholders, but highly unlikely the journey to completion will match CBs latest timescales or pathway.

Despite his repeated assurances.

"It,s not a case of whether XTR sells any gold in Q4 but how many oz of gold they've banked"-

My criteria for assessing overall alluvial performance will not be gold banked or gold sold, but overall gold production.

IMHO IT will be interesting to see if the increase in alluvial hard rock production (hopefully that will have kept increasing as GF keeps progressing) has off set the likely reduction in surface alluvial production due to the usual rains in Q1.

I'm expecting a slight overall drop in Q1 production. Same production as Q4 would be excellent result imho.

Should know by Tuesday next week.....unless results are poor then news is usually delayed

Alluvials Q1 should be this week or Tuesday latest after BH

(Back on 6.78p to buy)

on my x-o account or H-L

Hmmmm??

Assuming Jamesiecakes is correct, and I'm sure he will be, if we have 883 Oz of unsold gold at 2021 close.

= $1.633M at $1850 POC

= £1.24m from unsold Gold

Nice buffer

Alluvial / small hard rock Q1 results will be very interesting.

Only 18% of Q4 income was due to GF according to RNS and I expect that to have increased in Q1. However, Q1 surface alluvial income is always lower than Q4 due to the heavy rains.

I hope I'm wrong, but tbh I would be surprised if Q1 income is higher than Q4's .

Even if it is not, we should see a substantial increase in alluvial income in Q2 both from surface alluvial (no rains) and continuing ramp-up of GF and possible BE.

By Q2 results in mid July, we should also be getting some contribution from FB and possible Eureka, which I believe will then take us very near or possibly over the magical $1M a month net PROFIT figure.

...And also an update on FB imminent completion would not hurt :)

"Andrew4444 you think xtr could reach more than han 15p Next year?"

I believe that that time scale will be after the buy-out so we will be left with only African assets by then. I think 5 to 10p is more likely, FB wil be fully up and running by then. 15p for only African assets may be a bit of a stretch imho - but possible depending what added value Eureka adds.

That would be the icing on the cake as I'm assuming the buy-out will be circa 25p to high 30s - probably 30p and that should happen by end of the year.

Of course AIMHO against what we know now (or think we know). Things change. I may be wrong !

Cygnus

Your understanding is the same as mine. I believe in CBs last big sale shareholders got 50% cash and 50% in shares of the buyer.

I would then assume the sp would fall down to represent new MC so circa 5 to 10p?

Thats my guess and understanding so happy to be corrected.

Cat

I assume your 7500 was in USD. If so, then you havnt converted to £ so 31.5 x 0.76 -= 24p

My own assumptions are:

$9K POC
1.75% buy-out
1billion fully diluted

Which by coincidence, works out at exactly the same sp as when using your assumptions.

If ascot is a conservative 50% more than RC, and Iceberg is right with RC falling just short of 2m at 1.8, then that would mean 2.7m for both. Thats 35% increase from 2m base line so circa 32.5p

I'm hoping ascot is more than 50% of RC so we may get very near 3m?

Add in a conservative 5p from African assets then 40p does not look unrealistic.

"A fair price should be negotiated between both parties, and not to be forced to accept a valuation from a separate body that does not have a vested interest in an asset so valuable"

Agreed.

What if the independent valuation is significantly lower than CB thinks is fair and reasonable or much higher than AA think is reasonable and AA then believe that they are getting ripped off by paying a massively inflated price? Surely both parties should not be force to continue the deal?

My understanding, from listening to CB in two interviews is that they both are not forced to complete the deal and accept the IA. Which seems wholly reasonable and sensible imho.

I think the IA is a way of trying to bring both parties together and to try and help the process along to completion - if possible.

But if there is irretrievable difference of opinion then neither party should be forced to buy / sell.

Steve4077

I'm taking what he said at 17m 45 secs in, as evidence that we dont need to accept the valuation.

"Anglo dont need to accept that assessment, nor do we"

"I don't think we can reject, provided the AA offer is based on an independent valuation"

CB was pretty clear that we don't need to accept the independent valuation. 17m 45 secs in. He's said this twice, once in another interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDv0OEknsLk

AA have first refusal, not a compulsory purchase order.

Its in AAs interest to make a "can't refuse it" first, (and last), offer. If they get the valuation wrong, or we think we can get a better offer from going out to the market, then we can do that by rejecting AAs first offer and then the subsequent independent valuation (as CB stated in above interview).

Of course the risk to Xtract is that the other offers are not as good as AAs offer or independent valuation.