Member Info for BigBiteNow

Well as I said whilst things can always go wrong I see the tax loss transaction now as being mainly about time. 4 interested parties lend themselves to someone staying at the table for the duration. A minimum 100% return possibly rising to 200% is not to be sniffed at when gold prices are this high and tax payments elevated.

I believe something is possible pre-Christmas but if not then Q1 looks to be plenty of time to conclude a deal. So if an analysis of the funding indicates they have time until then (perhaps with a bit of beg borrowing but not stealing) it is a hugely important detail.

I agree the retaliatory and defensive comments from Mike are meaningful because they show that he is acutely aware of the criticism out there and if anything he entertains that too much. But as a signal, it is very strong when placed against the recent comments you have quoted. Reputation and trust are important if the valuation is going to reflect the true value of what they are working towards achieving. At its core is the reputational boost but also the sizeable return they would see on their shares. He is not stupid. He gets that because he has walked in our shoes.

So his willingness to rebuke placing questions so strongly should be listened to and the fact he is doing it indicates that alternative means exist to fund this business or they have enough in the bank to get this deal done.

I have had a look Gallmart and whilst I accept that they are a good comparison in some ways I stop short of seeing it as a full read across. Also, aren't we getting a little ahead of ourselves?

In answer, I would point out that two out of three of Huddles's businesses had already reached the operating profit stage in Q3. This reflects a simpler and smaller business model but also perhaps a better-run business/model.

For instance, what are those other external operating costs all about and what are they for? The notes (5 and 6) only cover a very small portion and don't explain the origin. I assume they are the posting or sorting element? Whatever the case it is they that are killing their operating profit. I also think they look much more eco-conscious and it affects their approach which may well be leading to inefficiencies. HUD is much more about buying cheap and selling fast.

Secondly, I am here mainly for what I believe Huddle can achieve in the next 12 months vs. its current MC. I can see a 200% return from HUD simply moving into profit which they are very capable of achieving based on the data I have seen. As the business grows I will worry more about the longevity of the business and my investment.

A 10m MC for what should now come through is a joke and that is why I have backed them and await the market catching on. Brief answer for now may add more later when I have time.

I am happy to delve deeper or debate the funding situation further with anyone who wishes to. Good or bad.

This RNS does have content that is real value once the funding to progress the project further is confirmed.

The majority aren't doing the analysis I just offered. They are simply looking at when the last raise was concluded assuming the tax loss result needs more time and concluding that these RNS's are designed to drive a fund raise. The problem with this game is that more often than not they are right. It's called playing the system.

But sometimes they get it wrong and I believe this is one of those occasions. But until the argument is buried RNS's like today's cannot impact the SP meaningfully. But once funding is resolved or a major tax loss deal is concluded then investors safe in the knowledge that cash is no longer a concern can revisit the progress made and begin pricing in what was ignored prior.

So it is not about "real value" but overall perception in a small caps market where nobody wants to research thoroughly.

ECR just need to keep enhancing the profile of its projects, deliver those tax losses and a production plan for Blue Mountain and all this talk of RNSs being seen the day before etc will be long forgotten along with 0.3p a share.

2/2

I don't see this management team diluting themselves (or us) unless absolutely necessary. I don't see them committing to drilling Tambo unless either they are,

a. comfortable with funding,

b. Tambo is too important (can't see that at this stage) or,

c. alternative funding is deemed close enough or reachable enough to allow it.

That funding could be tax losses, a sale of the Victoria property or something else entirely.

But if they have somehow reached a point where they haven't been able to avoid a raise then looking at how far they have stretched what they raised this year the sums involved don't scare me. Nor does their ability to access them. They could at best undermine SP progress for a short while but I am focused on the development path here which is looking more and more solid.

Tax losses should now be about what the deal looks like and how long it takes to complete. Those funds can now feed into two projects (Blue Mountain and Lolworth) which have a lot of potential. Especially Blue Mountain. Post Tambo, there should be no major expenses until Spring (assuming Creswick is parked) with Blue Mountain's progress being desktop and funding/build planning. Again, good reason to think funds can be stretched if the tax loss result looks reachable.

Some wish to paint a picture of limited progress that the market isn't interested in. I see it completely differently. I see assets growing in status and a path to first (small-scale) production that is much closer than it was 12 months ago plus a very good chance that a tax loss deal lands before new funding is required. I say this because it is clear that the BOD understand the impact such an outcome can have not only on the share price and the business but also on their own reputations at ECR. The ripple effect of that can be far more lasting than any immediate cash injection which itself should be significant.

Such an outcome would answer a great many criticisms and they have been around long enough to know this which makes me certain that they are razor focused on achieving it.

1/2

The results will be relevant if/when a tax loss deal lands. The same applies to Blue Mountain and any other project that ECR can meaningfully progress whilst we approach that outcome. All will be greatly enhanced when they are better funded.

Some don't believe ECR can land a tax loss result before a funding call. I am not one of them.

The way I see it is that this BOD didn't take shares instead of pay just to go and dilute themselves unnecessarily.

Plus, in December ECR secured A$420k from non-core asset sales at which time we were told that,

"the expected proceeds from these sales should exceed our G&A expenses for the coming year." That being 2024.

By the end of March, they had received 45% of this money so 55% was still to be received covering 75% of the year. So there or thereabouts those monies cover G&A until the end of the year.

Since then a director has left an office has been closed and more salary sacrifice has been executed although I can argue that this last one was in the thought process around "expected" and "coming year."

At the end of March ECR had £124,000 and added £585,000 (minus expenses in early April). Total = c.£700,000.

Creswick drilling in late 2023 looks to be fully covered by the previous raise in Sept 2023. Since March (as so many wish to drive home) it's been mainly rock chip sampling and trenching at multiple projects conducted by an in-house team. There looks to be some contracting that Adam is paid for but it isn't expensive work. We can argue that Gekko needed to be paid for the Blue Mountain study but again it wasn't a major study and they were likely enticed by future contract work.

Argonaut is a big one but I believe they are sharing in the spoils of any win. ECR policy under the new BOD has been to sign up well-known names to ensure credibility. If they couldn't afford Argonaut then it's unlikely they would have gone there given the risk of failure at the start of the process. So I think it's a profit share/finder fee set-up.

That leaves the one true cost for this year which is drilling at Tambo. Creswick drilling contributed to exploration costs in H1 2024 which totalled c. £150,000 in the H1 accounts.

Can Tambo at c. 500m of drilling over two weeks really be that high? I doubt it.

The interesting thing is that ECR committed to this drilling in late Sept which indicates that sufficient funds were there at around about the time that the first parties were signing NDAs for the tax losses. That indicates a more comfortable cash position than the market is assuming.

But that isn't to say that a funding update doesn't land. I never say never in this game. I am simply demonstrating clear evidence that their cash run is perhaps better than expected and their approach to spending is thrifty at best. In a previous interview, Mike did also say that funds could stretch into 2025.

@MarketAnalyst what would be your approach for establishing which project holds the most potential then? Or better still for adding value to a company that has yet to establish a JORC-compliant resource?

Rock chip sampling and trenching are a necessary step without them they would be just guessing on what is thousands of km of tenements.

Despite this, they have taken a significant step towards the first production at Blue Mountain by establishing an extraction method. Now they need to define a resource and a cost which takes a little time. But let's ignore that and just criticise from our arm chairs.

Well done for undermining the thread so that information that might be worth debating gets lost.

This RNS does have content that is real value once the funding to progress the project further is confirmed.

The majority aren't doing the analysis I just offered. They are simply looking at when the last raise was concluded assuming the tax loss result needs more time and concluding that these RNS's are designed to drive a fund raise. The problem with this game is that more often than not they are right. It's called playing the system.

But sometimes they get it wrong and I believe this is one of those occasions. But until the argument is buried RNS's like today's cannot impact the SP meaningfully. But once funding is resolved or a major tax loss deal is concluded then investors safe in the knowledge that cash is no longer a concern can revisit the progress made and begin pricing in what was ignored prior.

So it is not about "real value" but overall perception in a small caps market where nobody wants to research thoroughly.

ECR just need to keep enhancing the profile of its projects, deliver those tax losses and a production plan for Blue Mountain and all this talk of RNSs being seen the day before etc will be long forgotten along with 0.3p a share.

2/2

I don't see this management team diluting themselves (or us) unless absolutely necessary. I don't see them committing to drilling Tambo unless either they are,

a. comfortable with funding,

b. Tambo is too important (can't see that at this stage) or,

c. alternative funding is deemed close enough or reachable enough to allow it.

That funding could be tax losses, a sale of the Victoria property or something else entirely.

But if they have somehow reached a point where they haven't been able to avoid a raise then looking at how far they have stretched what they raised this year the sums involved don't scare me. Nor does their ability to access them. They could at best undermine SP progress for a short while but I am focused on the development path here which is looking more and more solid.

Tax losses should now be about what the deal looks like and how long it takes to complete. Those funds can now feed into two projects (Blue Mountain and Lolworth) which have a lot of potential. Especially Blue Mountain. Post Tambo, there should be no major expenses until Spring (assuming Creswick is parked) with Blue Mountain's progress being desktop and funding/build planning. Again, good reason to think funds can be stretched if the tax loss result looks reachable.

Some wish to paint a picture of limited progress that the market isn't interested in. I see it completely differently. I see assets growing in status and a path to first (small-scale) production that is much closer than it was 12 months ago plus a very good chance that a tax loss deal lands before new funding is required. I say this because it is clear that the BOD understand the impact such an outcome can have not only on the share price and the business but also on their own reputations at ECR. The ripple effect of that can be far more lasting than any immediate cash injection which itself should be significant.

Such an outcome would answer a great many criticisms and they have been around long enough to know this which makes me certain that they are razor focused on achieving it.

1/2

The results will be relevant if/when a tax loss deal lands. The same applies to Blue Mountain and any other project that ECR can meaningfully progress whilst we approach that outcome. All will be greatly enhanced when they are better funded.

Some don't believe ECR can land a tax loss result before a funding call. I am not one of them.

The way I see it is that this BOD didn't take shares instead of pay just to go and dilute themselves unnecessarily.

Plus, in December ECR secured A$420k from non-core asset sales at which time we were told that,

"the expected proceeds from these sales should exceed our G&A expenses for the coming year." That being 2024.

By the end of March, they had received 45% of this money so 55% was still to be received covering 75% of the year. So there or thereabouts those monies cover G&A until the end of the year.

Since then a director has left an office has been closed and more salary sacrifice has been executed although I can argue that this last one was in the thought process around "expected" and "coming year."

At the end of March ECR had £124,000 and added £585,000 (minus expenses in early April). Total = c.£700,000.

Creswick drilling in late 2023 looks to be fully covered by the previous raise in Sept 2023. Since March (as so many wish to drive home) it's been mainly rock chip sampling and trenching at multiple projects conducted by an in-house team. There looks to be some contracting that Adam is paid for but it isn't expensive work. We can argue that Gekko needed to be paid for the Blue Mountain study but again it wasn't a major study and they were likely enticed by future contract work.

Argonaut is a big one but I believe they are sharing in the spoils of any win. ECR policy under the new BOD has been to sign up well-known names to ensure credibility. If they couldn't afford Argonaut then it's unlikely they would have gone there given the risk of failure at the start of the process. So I think it's a profit share/finder fee set-up.

That leaves the one true cost for this year which is drilling at Tambo. Creswick drilling contributed to exploration costs in H1 2024 which totalled c. £150,000 in the H1 accounts.

Can Tambo at c. 500m of drilling over two weeks really be that high? I doubt it.

The interesting thing is that ECR committed to this drilling in late Sept which indicates that sufficient funds were there at around about the time that the first parties were signing NDAs for the tax losses. That indicates a more comfortable cash position than the market is assuming.

But that isn't to say that a funding update doesn't land. I never say never in this game. I am simply demonstrating clear evidence that their cash run is perhaps better than expected and their approach to spending is thrifty at best. In a previous interview, Mike did also say that funds could stretch into 2025.

Remember also that LODES + Everdura's confirmed 14.4MWh project cover the majority of 2025's forecast revenues. Then it will be about what they can add but achieving base would in my opinion be an outcome that is not priced right now.

Here is the quote for those who don't have Twitter access.

We may just be in the early stages of the turn around here.

"Invinity has had its 30MWh UK LODES project in confirmed orders for some time: we understand this project has been waiting on this green light to be finalized."

An interesting quote from Canaccord on the UK Cap and Floor decision's affect on LODES final sign-off.

Perhaps this project will be announced sooner than thought.

https://x.com/BigBiteNow/status/1848702856771047653

The market will want to see more concrete signs of mine life extension before pricing it in but yes I am clear that it will come.

Thank you for the article links guys. THX looks to have steadied somewhat after all of the fear late last month.

Quite remarkable to think that THX still sits at 16p when gold is running so high. I trust the company will put this intrusion to bed and market confidence continues to firm.

The next drill results should be due shortly.

On that, I found this sentence from the drilling update RNS interesting,

"The initial results have come from the southern most shoot and the 12-hole programme is designed to test the remaining shoots as a first pass, prior to extending the programme."

With 4 shoots in play, it looks very much like they only ever planned to drill each shoot a maximum of 3 times. So the initial two drill results having hit gold are likely enough to expand the drilling in that area once this first pass is completed. I do wish they had gone at this a bit harder but at the very least what they are doing so far is delivering positive results.

You may only be focused on sales but my responses in this discussion have clearly included average realised prices.

So on that front have you read his CV? Did you notice who it was who was answering the questions about prescriptions and reimbursements in the last investor call Q&A?

He may not be involved in sales but he's most certainly been involved in reimbursement discussions and development as he has in similar roles in the past.

No idea where my capitals went there but you get the gist.

a tweet here or a seller there it is all nonsense.

investors should be focusing on how quickly ecr can deliver a resource for blue mountain and an initial start-up cost plan. management was clear that they were "not going to dilly dally" saying "we don't intend spending weeks and months and years trying to work out where we are going to go with the project."

i am also conscious that they highlighted 1,000 tons of extraction being possible under an exploration license (as stated by someone here recently). that was said for a reason.

any sort of revenue that can generate cash flows opens up debt options. these guys have shown that they aren't messing about here. these types of strategic moves can be high impact when you are a £5m mc company.

any sort of clear path to revenues that is covered by funding and a sizeable re-rate is on here. figuring that out is what is important not ******** at every decision the company makes. this is a tough market for these micro-cap companies with no revenues. ecr management deserves some slack because to date operationally they have performed excellently and they are demonstrating that their hard work could just pull this off.

Hi Gallmart,

Not sure if you wanted a reply anymore but my view in terms of Trust Pilot is that you cannot please everyone all the time.

4.5 stars is very good compared to most. I remember being in YU Energy when they were going through their initial growth spurt and their rating dropped to 3.9 stars. It was often highlighted as a concern by investors and I regularly checked it for improvement. 2 years later the stock has done more than 700% and was in no way held back by its review scoring which even today 'only' stands at 4.2 stars.

What matters is the customer service overall and the company's commitment to it. I have traversed all 3 sites and indeed Trust Pilot and so far I have found the messaging to be very customer-orientated. When the first item is chosen on DD a message comes up reminding the customer to be aware of the best before dates on the products before buying.

They also talk very openly about orders potentially being processed 1 to 2 days later during busy periods and 1-2 days later in transit for the same reasons. I think it is this approach that wins the day in the end just like it did with YU when they went more digital. There will always be some customers who don't read what they are being told or who simply cannot accept any deviation from their own expectations. Yet still DD has just 1% 1-star reviews from nearly 21,000.