Member Info for Andrew4444

Hopefully it will be different this time...but we have seen this bounce between 4.8 to 6p many times. I remember the ASK hitting 6.3p in the last spike up.

Unless we get some news to support this rise I think we will see a slow fall back, yet again, to circa 5p to 5.5p.

I hope I'm wrong, but we may need to wait a bit longer for the breakout to happen, and that may need to be supported by news.

No quote for any amount for me.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying the reason for the lack of sp appreciation, but I think its just down to institutional investors waiting for a JORC. They dont want to take any risks and will be happy to pay a premium for substantial less risk after a JORC or more "big picture" data.

A PR offensive will get a few more retails investors interested, but that wont be the catalyst for the 10p+ rerate imho.

I believe this is the project CB referenced re sale for $480M

https://www.batimes.com.ar/news/economy/lundin-to-buy-copper-gold-project-in-argentina-for-us483-million.phtml

https://josemariaresources.com/our-projects/overview-feasibility-study/

As CB said, those figures do seem similar to Bushranger. Slightly better than ours though.

However, they are Proven + Probable Resources. I believe that is a higher classification than our resource will be??

Happy to be corrected, but If that's correct, we may find our buyout % is going to be about half of that sale . As Iceberg, and others said, the 3% buy-out often quoted is for a measured resource so we may bet 1.5 to 1.8%

Our location will help compared to Argentina, but I can't see that fully compensating for the difference in resource classification.

That said, I would think 25p min would still be possible. Of course if things keep improving, we may better those production figures at Josemaria?

I'm keeping an open mind on the drill results until ..........

the release of the Sue Gray report :)

(Sorry)

"Recent developments at Newcrest Mining's Cadia-Ridgeway Mine elsewhere within the Lachlan Fold Belt of New South Wales include construction of a new molybdenum processing plant which will allow Newcrest to process molybdenum concentrate as a by-product from their main gold operation. Xtract believes that the molybdenum credits may have the potential to add value to Bushranger, in addition to gold and silver."

I've said before that I think Newcrest will be the buyer. They have all the processing capabilities already set-up very near to Bushranger. They could offer more than AA and still have higher margins.

I think CB will consider any AA offer too low knowing that Newcrest would beat it as their costs would be much less than AA who would have to factor in much more capex for new processing capabilities.

Of course I maybe wrong but I doubt it.

(China Molly could also be the buyer for same reasons)

"does XTR go with the short term RC/ Ascot model or do a Solgold and drill ad infinitum to prove every last inch up ?"

Or he could go for the middle ground and drill for another 6 months and exploit more potential value (not all) from Ascot.

He says shareholders dont want another 2 years of drilling. He's right. But another 6 months for greater value recognition at Ascot would be worth while imo.

I feel the additional 6 months is a good balance between time horizon, costs and increase SP appreciation.

Even more reason to do more drilling at Ascot to find out what the real value is there.

CB maybe be right to say we dont need to do as much drilling at Ascot as we have done at RC to be able to sell Ascot, but we will need to do more drilling to try and determine true market value.

"When I read the RNS yesterday I was very happy, but also think this may put a spoke in the plans for a quick sell"

Yes it will.

But that circa 6 months delay and more ascot drilling, should see, at least, an additional 15p on the buy-out offer. So worth the wait (imo anyway)

On balance, I may be more inclined to go for Plan A, the quick sale, if it wasnt for the substantial increase in African income coming very soon.

"But then CB says that we do not need to prove Ascot the way Racecourse has been"

He's right. But surely the more certainty of purchase a major has the higher price they will pay.?

Maybe I'm underestimating CBs negotiating skills

Ascot could be much much bigger than Racecourse

“Yes Phatbaz, don't want to be sold short on Ascot”

I made that point recently. Its was a worry then and its getting more of a concern (to me) as these results come in.

I hope we do enough drilling at Ascot to realise the market value. It does beg the question why we are not doing more drilling than CB has implied we will do.

The two risks of more Ascot drilling are

1. Will we find economic resource 2. Cost leading to placing to fund more drilling.

CB has implied that the IP results at Ascot are as good if not better than Racecourse, so highly likely there is economic resource there. Early assay reports support that. He also said how our income will substantially increase from African income ramping up esp with FB coming into production. Would we need to raise with that level of income even with a big drill campaign?

So those two risks are mitigated imo.

I appreciate not everyone will have the same view on this but my concern is that we maybe selling Racecourse (with a JORC valuation) for fair value but not getting true value for Ascot as its not got a JORC. But could be bigger than Racecourse.

I hope we don’t end up selling the Ford Fiesta for fair market value, but throwing in a Lexus as the sweetener :)

1. We only sold less than half of the gold produced.

2. Income (not profit) was £340K a month (against all gold produced)

3. This type of income can be unpredictable and unreliable, but as last quarter was also good and its now being supported by more robust hard rock production, I think we can expect this level of income each quarter. And it should increase as GF and BE HR deposits increase production.

4. I can see why CB was dismissive of a raise.

5. When FB in production we should be on to £700K to £750K a month (ex Eureka).

6. Asitis (on other BB) will not be happy with this RNS. Oh dear :)

Wow !!!

Further to Howzap's point that "Ascot will be ‘very’ loosely inferred and discounted accordingly" we may find that the 2mt at Ascot, may only justify a buy-out of say 1% cont copper?

Howzap

I hope you are right and you may well be.

Maybe I'm being too pessimistic or I am underestimating CB's negotiating skills, but it seems , intuitively, unlikely we will get a 2mt copper valuation for ascot by not doing the usual drilling and assay results as per Racecourse. I guess it all sounds too good to be true to me.

Hopefully I'm going to be pleasantly surprised !

Aeris

I think Cornfords 3% figure was based on measured and now I think will not be getting anything like that. I'm expecting 1.5% to 1.8% now

My main point was not is CBs strategy right, but why would a major value Ascot at 2mt without empirical evidence from a number of assay results and drills – like Racecourse. Its not difficult to see how a major might value Racecourse at 2mt due to the evidence.

Reading the comments below, it would seem that a major would value Ascot at 2mt by a combination of CBs persuasive argument, the future POC, the advantage of a nearby “proven” racecourse deposit and the good GeoPhys results at Ascot.

I maybe wrong, but I would think that the head of M & A at a major would want more empirical evidence than that to value Ascot at 2mt and sign off a big fat cheque. They tend to be risk adverse.

If I am wrong and we do get a circa 2mt Ascot valuation from a major, then CB would deserve tremendous credit. CB would have saved us a lot of time and money proving up Ascot (to get to the 2mt) by his negotiation skills. Maybe he could do the same with footrot?

It will be interesting to see if that is the case.

I maybe missing something here, but I don't see why AA or any other major would value Ascot as 2mt unless there had been enough drilling to give the buyer enough confidence that it will be 2mt (or whatever size). My understanding is that we wont be doing a lot of drilling at Ascot just enough to show that there is resource there of some value? And lots of potential.

I think it likely that there would be 2mt at Ascot if we did an extensive drill campaign, but as we are not going to do that then wont the buyer value it at nominal amount?

If 5 or 6 drills could prove up Ascot at 2mt or a decent amount, why was it necessary to do 30+ holes at Racecourse ?

So we may get a valuation of just over 2mt but that maybe mainly down to Racecourse and due to the extensive drilling there The buyer may add on a bit extra (0.25mt to 0.5mt) for Ascot due to the potential against a few results from a few drill holes? But not another 2mt against a few drill holes?

Or am I missing something here?

To be fair, no year was give :)

That was the MC he was referring to.

Oh, I forgot to say. It keeps getting bigger and more economical .....

What you were referencing was the start point, not the end point.