We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
Plus the stock market in general has taken a tumble, sea of red on my watchlist.
I believe the last piece of Nachinery is now in place at Manica, and it looks dry...
Empress tweet seemibgly.
My Montene grins
Welcome back News....
What if XTR decides to keep, say 2.5% of bushranger long term, after the sale, so off the cuff, 400m sale price, retaining 2.5%, so sale 390M, give out even 10p per share, so say $250M remaining in the bank, to fund our 2.5% ahare of capex for the mine, of say 3 billion, CAPEX or $75M. (Last time i heard Colin speak of a mine cost it was $750M)
So 175 million would be available for further developments projects or dividends.
Add then Manica income, of circa 1M per month, plus Eureka, etc, and we could see better deals for further resourses there, 59/50 was talked of.
It would be conceivable of a decent annual dividend building up even before Bushranger came on line.
The above is mental sums that ran through my mind while walking on deck earlier, the sun was setting and it was nice and warm, +25 deg, I was smiling.
Having said the below, if offer counter offer are close and there can be negotiated agreement then there need be no independent valuation either.
In conversation at AGM, it certainly sounded like when there is an offer from AA on table, we can counter offer, then it will go to independent valuation a process takibg 5 to 10 days, (paid for by whoever was furthest from it), after whixh we can say no or they can say no.
On a tangent, they will be starting a drilling campain at Manica also, there are lots of untouched targets to aim at there too.
Having looked at the images from Andy's post, I notice the scale is wrong on the latest drill hole picture? It should probably be 0.5 and 1km not 1km and 2 km? Even that makes the lines drawn 300m apart not 2 as stated in the RNS?
I find it highly unlikely that all data held by XTR is in hands of AA, and onus on XTR to produce a modelled resourse of 2MT (or more), or a decision to mine, either way, it matters little to be honest, as the clause would be triggered and decisions on value woukd have to be made, agreed or rejected, with or without, independent valuation...
I find it unlikeky that All possible data held by XTR is in hands of AA, PUTTING onus on XTR to produce a modelled resourse of 2MT (or more), or a decision to mine, either way, it matters little to be honest, as the clause woukd be triggered and decisions on value woukd have ti be made, agreed or rejected, with or without, independent valuation...
Not for Anglo to approach us, we give a figure, they counter and if we don't like evenvafter the independent review, ( 5 to 10 working day limit, we, or they can say know, and all obligation in respect to the buy back sgreement would be gone.
And I would feel sure, prior to this external talks formal infoemal with other suitors are likely to have been commenced, around a ball park.
Just to butt in, my understanding memory from discussion with Colin at AGM was that it is that it is for US to go to Anglo, which prompted Kjell then to ask if we could not just announce 1.9 M tons, etc etc.???
This date has a nice ring to it, lots of little ducks lining up, time for some news.
Ref Steves post of 15:57, the NSR even diluted fully will be 0.75%, assuming they only mine 2.5 mtons contained copper over 20 years, that wouldvaverage 7.5 M per year once production got under way, noting first few years will be aimed at the higher grade areas, a nice steady income.
Not perfect, but need to let some of my holding go, though will hold onto @ 6 M to aim for >0.5%, med long term, for now builder requiring around 8k each week, so short term I will sell a few as and when required, noting at this price they are around 4x what I bought them for. But back of mind tells me it is going to be a bloody expensive extension.
Behind the green door.
At Agm, I remember Kjeld, conversationally asking Colin, what was to stop us declaring, say 1.9MT, just under the "M required, while we continue to prove the asset up, as far as I remember Colin countered along lines of it not being best route, and much better to prove u as much as value as possible before stating the resource, did anyone else that attended catch this, and Colin's precise reasoning?
This link explains it nicely.
https://www.youinvest.co.uk/pensions-and-retirement/pensions-explained/lifetime-allowance.
UT trade after close, not so much to fret about.