Member Info for BigBiteNow

Trial mining is due to commence this month using an upgraded (and so bigger) pilot plant (videos exist of the original plant operating on site).

The landowner provided site labour and digging equipment last time bulk sampling was carried out (again, videos exist of this online).

The land is full of creeks, and the wet season has just ended. I believe there are rules around interrupting the running water supply, but pooling is allowed under Queensland state rules. So it should not be a problem.

Bulk sampling with the upgraded plant is designed to establish the best areas for future larger-scale production and satisfy a resource report, which is needed for a full mining lease. However, Queensland's resource authority isn't like many other jurisdictions around the world. It is more flexible and allows production to scale ahead of any lease being finalised. That doesn't mean a full ML but staged growth, including small-scale mining.

Each stage of growth allows more gold to be extracted and the proceeds fed back into the project.

The most important thing is to find the best graded zones and transfer the Gekko process into a site/project reality.

"Bluekebble believed that shallow mineralisation down to 4 metres could potentially yield over 100,000 oz of Gold." ECR's task is to establish how true that is to decide how big the plant should/could be. There are no guarantees of success, but there is everything to play for and gold currently trades $600/oz higher than their forecast and may push even higher as the summer unfolds.

There are absolutely areas of this raise where criticism can be mounted, but do any of those things outsize what the funding can deliver or the insatiable appetite this BOD has to progress its assets? We could be looking at a 6-8 well production hub within 2 years of listing.

We are certainly one or two steps behind management thinking, and we are hanging on tight to the coattails, but the methodology looks well thought through, and actions so far protect overall investor returns. So long as it stays that way, then just keep going.

$20m in pre-tax cash flows says to me this is a +$100m MC company.

Talking of one or two steps, a successful drill at Inez #1 may just have brought Ingomar back into play in 2025.

After initially feeling shocked, sense kicked in and the detail and reasoning demonstrate this to be a very good RNS.

We can argue over the smaller details. The price could have been better, and someone clearly got wind of it, but the core of what it delivers is what matters the most. Offtake discussions have already taken place, so I take great heart from the company's decision to speed up production.

There is also the winter factor here, and the sense in expediting works whilst the weather is good. I also think this shows a great deal of confidence in the asset. After all, Bo is being diluted also.

The c. $12m target has been reached. Now, demonstrate that $20m is on the cards near term, and this fundraise to achieve it will soon be forgotten.

A TR-1 would be nice to see how many the family office took and prove they are keeping them.

https://x.com/BigBiteNow/status/1930515868137509350

Apologies, that should read Mr Standiford.

Hi Tilburn,

I've just picked up on your posts around Brainstorm Inc. Excellent work. I think you are on to a logical fit. If My Sandiford wanted to develop these wells himself, then he wouldn't have sold Rudyard to Helix. So it makes sense that other wells would be reviewed and potentially added to a growing Rudyard field.

Linda #1 was 1 mile south of Darwin #1. The next well Inez #1 is located a further two miles south of Linda #1.

That places it immediately west of Brainstorm Inc.'s Jackson-Berge 11-11 well and slightly southwest of Bradbury #1. Both of which are currently shut in.

It is difficult to assess how wide the Rudyard play is to roughly calculate if these wells are indeed within it. However, Bradbury #1 is so close that it is difficult to conclude that it is not. Excellent research and an interesting twist, be it that I feel more deals from somewhere were always on the cards because that is the MO.

We know this.

"Weil #1 was drilled by a private company in 2012, which tested 0.9% - 1.3% helium with a flow rate of 2,500mcf/d, indicating strong reservoirs and the potential for higher absolute overall rates."

"Helix plans to re-enter the Weil #1 well and create a single perforation to test both formations simultaneously, including any pay in potential fracture porosity between the two reservoirs. It is anticipated that this completion will produce higher absolute flow rates and allow for better production profile in line with Darwin #1 and Linda #1 when helium processing commences over summer 2025."

Nothing is ever 100% until it is, but the riskiest drill was Linda #1, and that came in with bells on.

Not long to wait.

@CLSKBull I agree with your first point. By all means, hit problems but demonstrate that you are working on them, and demonstrate that cash is not an issue, and the SP would likely be in a different place because it helps remove the opportunity to find negativity.

Please ignore the last sentence. Editing error.

I would also add that if the form is to lie to get placings away along with the selling, then the silence of the last 2 months isn't working in their favour. Surely if lying is the game then why not issue a report telling the market everything is hunky dory and then push a placing through again. Instead, they have allowed the SP to tank through silence. The amounts they need to keep the lights on are achievable even in this market, off the back of a decent RNS.

I would also ask where the fee conversions come in (April 2024). If it's a lifestyle company, then why take shares? Why not just milk the cash on hand?

There is a possibility that the mine is delivering enough cash flow to allow them to avoid such a funding scenario (thanks to these gold prices) and that they are working through the worst of the wet season (which may have hit production) before beginning to report better numbers. I don't like that approach, but it is plausible. This is after all heap leaching, which means a lot of gold remains in circuit (so to speak), and so (even in the worst case position) production in some form or other will be continuing.

Just some thoughts.

My position is small enough to take the risk here at such low MC levels because it is already so heavily discounted. So if my take is wrong, then so be it, and I would gladly read more concrete evidence on the accusations around lying. But as harChris has said it is feasible that

I still hold a few of these, mainly because I believe the current gold price can right so many wrongs and production in the early part of the year (as far short of the stated target as it currently is) looks more than sufficient to enable positive cash generation based on previous AISC guidance.

But I am interested to learn more about the accusations of lies because that is different. However, I am also prepared to challenge the statements made.

Since GRL relisted, they have reported a rise to the target of 48,000 tons of stacked ore per month, completed further pads (including extensions and additional stack lifts) and achieved the sort of recoveries (68%) that alluded them before being suspended. If the grades in pit 2 hadn't dropped off, then they would likely have hit their production target already. Unless, of course, these facts are untrue. But where is the proof that they aren't?

I see a history of challenges for this company, including low gold prices and high inflation. I also see management errors. But as a counter to this, I see substantial support from AIMs and their insistence that the mine management team be changed, with the result of that action beginning to take effect in Q1 2025. I struggle to find any evidence that AIMs wishes to take the mine over without first knowing it is de-risked. They have had multiple chances to do so and have not taken them. Instead, they chose to increase their stake. There is nothing to say that they are any more competent than the current GRL team, but they have at the very least put their money where their mouth is, and they are calling more of the shots now.

However, this new team cannot guarantee that the oxide layer will deliver an increase in grades. But at the same time, we cannot ignore the current gold price. It rights a great deal of wrongs and allows positive cash flows to be achieved from what would normally likely be substandard ore. Given the drill results already established below the oxide layer, there is a great deal to play for if GRL can deliver sufficient cash flows to explore and establish even part of what is there. In this gold price environment, such grades and potential can carry a high valuation to any potential buyer. But first and foremost, they have to deliver those cash flows to a point that it is comfortable to expend money on exploration.

The silence after such a sustained period of reporting is a concern and disrespectful to investors who have come to expect better reporting. It also feeds the narrative that they are hiding something. There is also certainly risk here, be it that the potential rewards are also very great.

When previous investors talk, I am prepared to listen. But I am also not prepared to ignore the facts around progress at the mine and what these very elevated gold prices can rescue. If these gold prices had existed in 202,2 then GRL would likely have got through their problems with a lot less pain.

It should be noted that those revenue figures I have used on based on what I understand the current group AOV to be. I expect this to rise, which can have a growing influence on both revenues and cash flows when orders are at 2,700 per day and rising.

Morning,

My approach to investing in Huddled is based on a staged development. The first stage is simple and involves building out orders to fill the current warehouse as we currently understand it.

For me, that is a minimum of 2,700 orders per day, but could be as high as 3,500.

That would enable a business that is delivering revenues somewhere between £34m - £44m and would have reached various ranges of cash flow positive.

The size of the discount goods prize tells me that they can get there without having to worry about the supply of goods or demand. That will come at some stage, but right now I don't need to consider it too much because the MC is already so low vs. that sort of revenue/cash flow deliver.

The two outstanding questions that achieve that are,

1. The warehouse's ability to ramp up without causing too many mistakes = refunds.

2. Does Huddled have sufficient funds to get to that point?

I have shared my views on both of these already. Nothing I have seen points towards a problem with either.

If that is the case, then at the mid-range, Huddled should be capable of reaching c. £40m in revenues. If so, then even on a conservative revenue metric of 0.5x EV/sales (which doesn't need to hold that level, it merely needs to reach it), we should be talking about a doubling of the share price from these levels.

I believe the BOD is much more ambitious than that, and as the plans and updates come through, I will adjust my figures, etc, accordingly. What I am talking about here is the rawest of base cases on a risk/reward set-up. An outcome that has nothing to do with competition, supply constraints or demand issues because the outcome is so near-term.

Can things still go wrong? Of course. Risk is never entirely removed. But this is about how much risk vs. reward exists. As I see it, a successful push to 2,500 orders per day already signals much more than the current MC is demonstrating, such that I don't need to talk moats or new warehousing just yet. That will come at some point, but this can be a very successful investment without ever having to concern myself with those potential challenges.

2,500 orders simply cannot be the end destination with the new warehouse floor so fresh.

I could get into expected EBITDA numbers as Huddled moves through that revenue range, which I think would deliver a far higher SP than 0.5x EV/sales, but I don't need to right now. I just need to keep monitoring the progress. Allow the company time to deliver the figures and cement my confidence in the stage 1 figures, and be patient.

No problem, I get the impression that Huddled's marketing is ramping up, which says a lot about that gap to 2,500 orders per day.

Note the fragrance flash sales at Boop (new one today). We were told at the last update that they had achieved 640 in one day (isolated), and Boop management was being challenged to push this to 2,000. Fragrances are an easy AOV driver, but it is also a sign of confidence in the warehouse.

Take a look also at the free Ray-Ban sunglasses offer over at DD when you spend over £100. Already sold out, which means how many +£100 orders were placed? This perhaps means reduced margin, but it also means one fulfilment cost process for sales that are nearly 3x historic levels.

They are running these deals almost daily alongside the penny deals. It is also a great way to shift excess stock. But most importantly, it points towards improving AOV and more orders.

That initial stuttered reaction to Linda #1 flow test results is looking like an absolute gift now.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Helix could now secure a long-term off-take with a per-unit pricing schedule attached? Note the messaging that is being introduced,

"With the helium market undergoing major structural challenges, our near-term production, strong reservoir performance, and low-cost operating model uniquely position Helix as a large domestic source of helium"

Domestic supply in a world og geopolitical tensions and tariff threats. Nothing is guaranteed, but I believe such near-term US supply will be in high demand. That says solid pricing. Secure that and there is very little standing in this company's rapid growth cycle.

Exciting times.

https://www.firsthelium.com/news/2023/331-first-helium-enters-into-long-term-helium-supply-agreement-with-major-global-industrial-gas-company.html

Some consolidation around these sorts of levels would be a good thing before the updated reserves report and plant commencement.

Given the improved market backdrop and tariff interruptions/delays in the US, the upcoming news flow should be met with further positivity as the Summer unfolds. A significant jump in the reserves will also lead to a broker upgrade.

Some really good thoughts there, BobbyAxelrod. It is great to see some debate starting to form on this BB.

I, too, think Boop is the most exciting brand because of its low picks vs potential for high AOV. Just look at the flash sale taking place today on £80 bottles of perfume. Then I cast my mind forward to Q4 and think about what that could mean for that period.

I wouldn't underestimate what the new warehouse set up means for DD. It has suffered for Nutricircle and Boop to grow, but from Q2, that is no longer the case. The broker expects £3.6m this quarter, which would really demonstrate the growth to be had from this brand moving forward. Having reviewed the website and talked with management, they have really honed their offering to ensure that customers return. I think we will see evidence of that in the Q2 update.

Nutricircle was tracking towards £1.6m in Q2 revenues as of the investor presentation. That is 33% higher than Q1. That would be excellent progress. Niche-driven loyalty and community word-of-mouth offer great support to further solid growth and a rising AOV.

But I think the most important of all is the management team here. They come across as driven and hungry for success.

I really do think we have an absolute gem of a growth story here that hasn't reached many investors' radars yet. I expect Q2 numbers will begin to change that.

I don’t think that deeply about it. Instead I use the company’s guidance as my base.

180,000 orders per quarter from one floor was the last call after the latest efficiencies (less picks per order at DD). Adding a second floor and separating out the brands naturally leads to a significant uplift. My numbers are very mobile given the fact that we receive insights on progress nearly every week.

That all said HUD said this in July last year,

“ We have recently moved to three shifts during weekdays and two shifts at weekends allowing us to process circa 36,000-40,000 parcels per month, this will, we believe, scale further when the additional space comes on board..”

That is perhaps fairly maxed out on shifts but with the new warehouse floor and better space management/systems I can see more room for staff on those shifts. My view only.

Management has thus far demonstrated that they have the energy and innovation to keep driving new ideas on order growth and cost savings. This is very much a case of follow the form.

Hope that helps and thank you. HUD is data rich and there is lots to learn that the market simply doesn’t want to take the time to understand. That makes it a great investment if they continue getting things right.

2/2

As existing customer numbers rise, the c. 45-50% on the additional AOV gained goes straight to the bottom line because all processing costs were already covered.

Get back to 2024 style numbers, especially at DD, and profitability will rise much more quickly without ever having to worry about warehouse capacity.

Example.

270,000 orders per quarter = 1.08m per year. Increasing the AOV by £2 per order between the end of H1 2025 and FY26 would add c. £1m + any reductions in average marketing spend per order.

I feel strongly that Huddled is building towards being operationally ready for Q4. 2,500 orders per day does not feel like the end goal for that. Not when they will have such a strong customer base compared to last year and significantly more targeted stock to shift. Again, my view only.

I think the first port of call, valuation-wise, is positive cash flow generation. I expect that to be reached by July, but perhaps won't be signalled at that time. I believe H1 2025 YoY revenue growth will also open a few eyes. That should be known by late July.

But I don't see Huddled as a spike style investment. I want to see it rise in steps. I think the above two realities achieve the first step. Q4 is likely to be very busy, and the January 2026 FY update is a major milestone in the next 7-8 months. But on the way, the market should start to appreciate the growth being achieved and what it means for where the business is heading.

1/2

The company is guiding those sorts of product margins as being achieved. That being "solely the cost of buying goods versus sale price."

These initial improvements have come through increased purchasing power driven by larger orders directly with suppliers themselves rather than middlemen/women, and the building of trust/strengthening relationships + offering an ESG reporting angle. This is in part why last year's numbers aren't worth much because none of these changes had been realised yet.

HUD confirmed that as of April, the warehouse could achieve 180,000 orders per quarter based on one floor.

The new combined warehouse floors have already been stress tested. to c. 2,500 orders = c. 228,000 per quarter.

The warehouse picking and overhead costs are fixed at that level (confirmed by HUD) and likely at higher levels also. How high is a good question. My working figure (which is updated whenever I receive new data) is 270,000 per quarter. A group AOV of £35 is fair = c. £38m in revenues. But Q4 is likely to he a higher AOV.

However, I think I am playing it safe there, and we have been told in the past that orders can be increased through more pickers, which come with a limited additional cost. Having seen what the warehouse looked like with one floor (video from HUD now deleted) compared to the video from Friday, there is a massive difference in efficiency and operational space. Friday's video indicated that c. 1,300 orders could already be fulfilled on Discount Dragon's floor alone. I don't think they were stretching themselves too hard to achieve that. My view only

I don't think you will ever see the product margin talked about in the accounts. The cost of sales will be the focus, which will include the warehouse/order processing costs. H1 2025 should demonstrate a significant rise in the gross profit, which will allow better forecasting. But even then, it needs to be understood that further growth in orders leads to stronger gross profit per order because the warehouse fulfilment costs are in that figure and are currently fixed. That means all orders that come after that start with a higher gross margin.

Sales aren't a problem. This is about growing into each stage of capacity to ensure that returns and customer satisfaction are maximised, so they come back and spend more for less marketing cost. It is this approach that has me convinced that 2,500 is merely the next sensible leg up. Reach that point and feel comfortable with it, and then go again.

In addition, we must not forget the AOV, which has been pulled down so far this year as Huddled has driven new customers. That also means marketing costs are higher, which are included prior to gross profit being calculated.

It is just 1 month since the AGM, where a very clear statement was made on Blue Mountain,

"In Queensland, our Blue Mountain Project (the "Blue Mountain Project") offers the potential for a significant near-term revenue opportunity, with production targeted to start later this year. Earlier testing by Gekko Systems Pty Limited ("Gekko") on ore samples collected at the Blue Mountain Project demonstrated a recovery rate of 91.7% gold into 0.40% of the mass, suggesting the ore's suitability for gravity concentration using a batch centrifugal concentrator. A further bulk sampling campaign will aim to validate our operating and financial model before potentially moving into production. We are projecting monthly revenues of approximately A$470,000 (US$295,000) from the Blue Mountain Project, based on a 0.6 g/BCM grade, a 25 tonnes per hour wash plant, and a gold price of US$2,790 per ounce. Dual wash plants could further boost output and of course with gold prices more than 15% up on the levels used in our feasibility assessment, the returns are well underpinned. The estimated costs for the work programme and wash plant are included in our 2025 budget."

The first 25tph wash plant and associated work programme is currently allowed for in the 2025 budget. No more, no less.

I take encouragement that the team is heading to Blue Mountain next. That means trial mining with the refurbished plant will likely begin as planned before the end of Q2.

What it should also indicate is that the survey work has borne enough fruit (at a minimum) to make returning to the site with a trial mining set-up worth it.

Trial mining allows material to be processed, which can be sold and reinvested in the project.

The mining lease is as straightforward a process as it can be for mining, but it still needs to be achieved. It requires a resource report/estimate, which the trial mining is designed to help close out. The resource report also enables future production plans to be mapped out. i.e. does the project warrant more than one processing plant, and at what size?

All of this is being managed by a seasoned mining man in the form of Mike Parker.

This does not guarantee success. It is merely the state of play as I understand it to be today.

ECR may well rise at some point again, but if Blue Mountain progresses through its stages well and options for increasing the wash plants on site come through or the resource proves to be something close to the previous owner's belief or better, then it shouldn't be a big issue.

However, the message is that production from the first wash plant is fully costed. Extraction should be low-cost. Gold is running c. 20% stronger than they have priced for, and the average grade has room for improvement.

No more, no less.