Member Info for Cornishknocker

Just to put those figures into context, if you lift your mill re overly from 70% to 90%, that becomes a 30% increase in revenue.

I've just had a chance to watch it properly, it all sounds very good to me. The best bit is the metallurgy at redmoor, there's a pretty big hint there that the results they are getting are far better than those being used in the current figures. The current figures are taken from testing carried out in the mid 80's, as a result of the tin crash in 85 a lot of work was done in Cornwall to improve recoveries, the the point that by 1998, the Wheal Jane mill, which was by then being used for treating south crofty ore, had become the most efficient tin mill in the world, achieving recoveries over 90%.
The testing being carried out is taking place at Wardell Armstrong, based at the Wheal Jane site, at WA a lot of the staff were involved in the running of that mill, if we can get those sort of figures, that is another massive uplift to the project.

If there was likely to be a placing that would have a negative impact on the price, would the wife of one of the directors have bought shares at open market this week? I think not.....

It's a simple but important distinction for sure. Mines output is pretty much always quoted as %age metal in concentrate, the logic being the value is in the metal and the concentrate grade is variable - also a lot of mines produce several different grades. You rightly say though that quoting a concentrate at a grade would be just as valid.

The only issue I can see is over the copper/Copper cement distinction. In the original purchase it states "the plant has a nominal capacity of 2200 tonnes of copper". I read that as 2200 tonnes of copper not copper cement. It also states that for minimal capital expenditure that can be increased to 4000 tonnes.

I'm not quite sure what the timetable is for the PFS at Redmoor at the moment. It was originally planned for Q3, it's just a case of whether the resource needs upgrading to indicated first. The work programme should be being released soon.

Just a note on cash generation for Leigh Creek, the figure JP is alluding to appears to be operating profit not Revenue. Copper is currently $6500 per tonne, we get paid 85% of that with sales of 2400 tonnes per year which would give a revenue of $13.26 million US.

With regards to Cobre, I expect the reason why last year's contract only ran to March was because that was when our access to the magnetite as contracted until. If we didn't have the forfeit clause and we lost access, we wouldn't be able to take the magnetite that had been paid for. As we have access secured, I expect last year's agreement will be rolled over.

It was a good attempt for sure!

And a couple of DFS's to look forward to as Well! This is setting up lovely.....

I can't see any dms use in that process. The problem with dms in a facility like this is it's a wet process, that would mean the product would have to be dried after and that costs money.

The one who is particularly keen is Neal Gallagher, the BBC business correspondent, his documentary on the final months of Crofty was impressive and won n award. As it happens he lives in Callington

It looking likely that there is going to be a big announcement in Canada with the department for international trade and Strongbow tomorrow. That could have a positive impact here.

Its hard to benchmark it at the moment, there is so little information available ion terms of strip ratios, bench heights, ore body shape etc.

What it is possible to see is: -
1. Its not at all capital intensive, as the capital infrastructure is there.
2. its a low cost operation as it is a heap leach type operation.
3. The grades are reasonably high.
4. The mining cost should be low as its shallow, meaning low strip ratio, low pumping costs and low haul costs.

In other words all of the qualities of the operation stack up to a good return.

I reckon we must be due a work programme for Redmoor now NAE have their funding, I think all of our other projects are due news as well

I said in my mind buying NAE shares would be silly, as in my opinion they are at risk of losing the lot.

Personally I have no concerns with it. The fundamental issue is whether or not the ore is leachable, it is. The reasons for poor performance after that is technical, is the rock to coarse, is it over compacted, leading to poor leachate flow. Is tge solvent mic wrong? That's where you need someone experienced running the show.

I think the problem is tge market views Leigh Creek as a risk, they don't understand why we will succeed where others have failed. Ultimately the company have invested the time to understand tge problems and should overcome them.

Using the figures in last years scoping study, it ends up with an NPV of £330 Million and an IRR of 42%.

That's rolled up within the 8% discount rate, for SML I believe it will be lower due to the ability to fund from our own cash flows a large proportion

It's the same company but a promotion.

Just to be clear with my figures, I haven't used any of the figures from last year's scoping study. I've used a capital cost of £150 million, in the study it was $115 million, so that's a 50% uplift. My mining cost is also about 15% higher.

I've done that only because at present we don't have enough information to put accurate costs in, so in my mind it's better to be conservative, but even then the project economics are solid.