Member Info for Cygnus7

Good point Cyber. You would think they'd be screaming " get out while the goings good!".

Guess it shows the motives of these individuals.

I suggest it's because they are in discussions - albeit possibly informal ones and have been asked to keep things under the radar.

Sorry, should have said - companies with an interest in Cu.

As the prof says, the price of copper has dropped recently and this has reflected in 3 different companies (this being one) I hold that have dropped quite dramatically recently. Keep the faith !

Dear All,
After yesterdays excitement I think the reality is that a few traders were looking for an RNS that meant there was a big pay-day on its way and what turned up was mainly confirmation that the pit to the SE was at last closing. The difference between the expectation and the reality meant an over-blown sell off. One that looks to be repairing itself nicely this morning. I couldn't top up myself as I've promised myself that I've bought all I can judiciously buy.
As for a sale in 22 or 23. All for the later date if it means that Ascot (and possibly a 3rd system ?!) get to be properly explored.

Having just written that, it's jumped to -7%. Should keep my mouth shut....

Two of my other Cu, pm and iron ore companies are down 10%, so -5% for XTR seems like a relatively good day !

Andy,
If Ascot is being batched up with RC to get over the 2MT line then that would not stop drill results or assays being published. Consequently I, along with you, think it's down negotiations with AA.
Cygnus

Some have suggested that the lack of news is because the news is bad. Can't see that myself. What bad news could be on the horizon? Potentially:
The news that RC has finally closed off. Oh horror. That means the model can finally be completed and presented to AA.
The possibility that Ascot appears to be smaller or less valuable than anticipated. O.K, but at worst that means that anything in Ascot (which appears to be more valuable per ton of ore than RC) can simply be added to RC - so, not exactly bad news.
How about the new drill sites. If these applications were turned down then it doesn't retract from the value of RC.
If the IP survey is disappointing, again, Ascot was always the cherry on the cake. That's no reason to stop news about drill holes or assay results.
What about if the model has come back with a resource less than 2MT. O.K, that would be bad news but no reason to stop reporting assay results from Ascot - which can be bundled together with RC.
The only real disappointment is lack of news from Africa but that in itself is unrelated to Auss other than the financial assistance it gives to the continued exploration there.
So, as far as I'm concerned, the radio silence is good news. Frustrating as we all want to know what's going on but ultimately - I think it means good news. It suggests that AA are probably, informally in discussions with CB.
My own wish would be that some sort of deal can be done with AA that allows us to continue the exploration of Ascot but I'm not sure how realistic that is.
Just my musing and thinking aloud.
Cygnus

I feel the continual ebb in the sp is solely due to a lack of news.
However, I can't decide whether that lack of news is itself - good news or bad.
I thought Easter would be when the avalanche of news would arrive and then following the bank holiday.
It does suggest that news, be it good or bad will arrive in a rapid flow and that alone could trigger investor interest but I would prefer little crumbs of news on a regular basis: the way we have become accustomed to with XTR.
I know I'll be told to be patient and in general I am a patient person but a lot hangs on the news to be delivered soon and I have a big personal investment here so I'd like to get out of the 07:01 checking of the RNS tab on this website!
GLA

Apparently he needs to declare war to be able to call up eligible males rather than just those already serving in the army.

Sorry Facevalue, maybe I mis-interpreted your question !

Facevalue,
I'm assuming you're pretty new here.
There is no plan to build a mine. The plan is to sell to Anglo American or failing that, to the highest bidder.
That's what makes this one of the best companies on AIM. We do not have to look forward to years of plan development, licenses and dilution while holding onto the dream. We prove up the resource and sell. Hopefully by summer, or if we are lucky and Ascot needs more drilling, the autumn with a corresponding increase in value. Then we are out - no hanging around.

5x5, I see they have you down as a sell !

IWTO, there was a discussion about 6 months ago on this subject and the feeling was that RC was too big to be able to drill to anything more than an overall low measure of confidence. It would be too expensive and take too long. Certainly Ascot will involve a lot of arm waving so not sure if that would be part of any deal or whether it would be considered separately.

My only concern with maintaining CB's original timeline is that Ascot will not be properly explored and we will not get top dollar for it.....

IWTO: maybe CB's chatting to AA and they want the news to dry up for now?

Thanks Porvenireal. Will take a look.

Howezap, yep... have read all of icebergs notes and well worth a read.
My point was simply that I think that Ascot may be worth more per ton (although size may be another factor) than RC as otherwise can't see how the geos would recognise it as being different to RC without the Cu eqv grades being a significant improvement to those in RC.

I've been thinking about the prospects for Ascot and trying to piece together what it may mean for the overall prospects for BR. Ascot identified itself as a new porphyry because its geological fingerprint was noticeably different to RC. Had the copper grades been weaker than RC it would surely just have been thought of as evidence that the resource was petering out. So, clearly, in terms of Cu the grades must be noticeably stronger than RC or the prevalence of precious metals must be obvious. From memory I think that the hand held X-ray analyser is no longer used as it led to cherry picking of results. So, question for the geologists: can simple metallurgical tests be carried out by the on-site geologists or is this stuff purely due to an educated eye-ball? If eye-ball deduced, what sort of grades would be necessary to be obviously visible.
Any input would be appreciated.
In all, it does seem that for the team to be able to announce a new porphyry suggests that it must be more valuable in terms of Cu grades or pms per cubic ton than RC.
Cygnus