RE: IOCG25 Oct 2020 10:35
If I may just put in 2p.....
I'll come to the IOCG shortly, but that aside, the initial target here is 1million ozs, that's a further 889,000 ozs and change over and above what we already have JORC'd in the ground. Putting that into context, the 211,000 ozs are just not really viable for a potential major player to be interested in, including COBR. It's not really got any attraction. But, the value of a couple of hundred thousand ozs could be in the region of £10m mcap, on a oz for oz basis. If we are able to prove up 1million ozs, then we could see an mcap of upwards of £40million with a decent Pre-feasability report. After all, 1million oz of gold is worth approximately $2billion. So our target for now is to get to a resource of 1m oz, and given the nature of the area, transport links etc, an mcap of £40m is not unexpected at all, given that 1m ozs is proved-up.
But, with IOCG, well that's completely different. If there is an IOCG of any decent scale, then this would mean a farm-in at the very least. Given that they are not common, but at the same time, the pathfinder results at Grace have shown highly anomylous molybdenum, then at the very least, we will be seeking to push for a response to the ADI funding. My guess is that some of the drill work (some 3250m) that is not yet plotted in, will likely be used to determine more credence to the suspicion of an IOCG target and this may be why we have not had a response......it could be that we were required to submit more data for this to proceed, (We are clearly not party to the commercially sensitive documents that CM would have submitted to the SA government).
So if, and its a big if, we get to find an IOCG of any scale, then we are looking at a 20-40 bagger easily. But it isn't really the core here as a million ozs will do quite nicely for now anyway....
All Opinion and speculation based on what data is available to all.