Member Info for Daisan

I seem to recall there was a bit of a campaign on here and other bulletin boards to do just that years ago. The environment for mining companies has changed and the need for social engagement is paramount. I don't believe that the current team would have forgotten this.

As I have said previously, the management team here have a lot of credit in the bank, so until informed otherwise I will go along with that. That said, those timescales are pretty tight given that we haven't even completed the DFS. 18 months to get into production doesn't leave a lot of margin for error and these things do tend to have teething problems.

I am sure that it will come as a complete surprise to the company that it rains in Indonesia. After all, they have only been active there for 20 years.

Excellent read. Looking forward to BKM study, BKZ resource statement and Beutong drilling butnit is great to see that Baroi is clearly on the near term agenda.

VELA will go up and down according to the performance of its underlying investments but I am quite surprised at the amount that BTL has fallen. Then again, I was quite surprised by how much it rose so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised at the fall. The quite aggressive selling by one of the founders has certainly not helped. I am pretty confident that Blockchain in general and BTL specifically will ultimately be successful but how this translates into share price performance, who knows? The long term growth trend would suggest that BTL is nearing support but if that breaks the next stop would appear to be the low 3s.

An incredible reminder of what is on offer here with the focus on the deeper mineralisation. I have spent the last couple of hours looking over this and the potential is quite staggering. Consider that what we have so far defined is one near surface deposit (BKM) which is good by itself. We are currently adding another with the BKZ polymetallic deposit. There are a number of other targets, including the potential company maker that is Baroi (remember the 11m, 11% copper intercept?). Then consider that the belief is that there are large, underlying sources to the deposits that have not yet been located (or even drilled!). Given the number of these deposits, their proximity and the size of the area, it is not too wild a suggestion that the whole area is sitting on a very significant copper/gold anomaly. This project is going to unfold over a period of several years with, hopefully, BKM/BKZ providing the necessary funds to explore the COW in all directions and to depth. I fully intend to remain invested to see the value realised (although I can't guarantee that I won't take profits occasionally along the way).

It is an interesting piece (why are they angry?) and there is some sense to what is said. One of the comments suggest a 5mt operation to produce 25kt copper a year. This is based on the M&I resource now and takes no account of converting the much larger inferred resource. I would think that the resource could support 2-3 times this rate reasonably easily. Steve has said relatively recently that they believe they can add a few hundred million tonnes to the current resource. Add this to the fact that they have started drilling, are adding a rig and are increasing their stake to 80% suggests that the people on the ground believe that there is more to go for. The last couple of days have flagged up two different sources who variously have said that they shouldn't drill deeper or shouldn't drill at all. Whilst they are both credible, the Asiamet team have got a lot of credit in the bank for their actions so far so I will support their view until proven otherwise. Even if the size of the body cannot be extended much further, the current process will convert inferred resources to M&I so will increase the potential output. A 20 year/50kt per year operation should prove highly lucrative given a rising copper environment.

They are certainly more expensive to drill - Beutong as a whole will be a lot more expensive than the likes of BKZ - but the fact is that they have got a drill that is capable of going down as far as 1000-1500m so why not take a look? A 1000m intercept will be treated as a whole different ball game. If TM's strategy really is to use the profits from a producing BKM to explore the wider KSK and Beutong then we are talking a long end game here whereas drilling up Beutong to dress it up for a sale that would fund KSK would be a lot shorter.

Thanks for the well reasoned argument!

Interesting. I am intrigued by the comment that the drill is unlikely to get below 750m on the basis that this is an Indonesian asset. Not sure why drilling below 750m would suggest otherwise. Is he concerned that by delineating a monster asset that this will attract the wrong sort of attention? I would suggest that 2m tonnes of contained copper is already capable of attracting attention. I am of the opinion that they WILL drill lower than 750m. In fact, the latest interview with Steve has indicated a drill capable of drilling down to as far as 1500m. I see no reason why he would have said this if they were going to stop at 750m. Personally, I want to see what is down there and I would hope that we could maintain the same stakeholder focused approach that we have up to now. I think that you are right that KSK is bigger than Beutong. Or at least than Beutong is now. If drilling at Beutong indicates that west and east are part of the same body and that mineralisation extends down to 1000m and beyond, then comparisons to Wafi Golpu would be valid not just from a geology standpoint.

If I am reading this correctly, existing shareholders of Brandshield only receive part of the 500m ICOs reserved for Brandshield. As they are distributing 5% on the day of the token generation event and this is stipulated as 10m tokens, this suggests that 200m are to be distributed to shareholders over a period of a year from end Q2 ish. BNR's stake is 8.95% so they should receive 17.9m tokens which at $0.20 (final stage) will be valued at �2,544,485 based on current exchange rate. I believe that this is accurate. One issue is that these tokens will be vested over a period of a year so the market will value this as less currently. All that said, it seems like an attractive proposition.

Interesting and bizarre!

At the end of the day. Way below bid suggests that somebody wanted the cash.

I have reasonable confidence that there are people involved who will ensure that the company's focus remains on benefits for all stakeholders. Long term benefits will only accrue in that way.

I suspect that Guy selling in several batches has damaged sentiment to compound the crypto shakeout. Hopefully he can stop for a while! No reason why BTL shouldn't have a shot at considerable success given the potential of Blockchain.

Personally I would not want to live under a system of religious law.

I have a bit more confidence in Ramaphosa. He has a tightrope to walk but inherently I think he believes that the way to advance the South African people's lot is through a successful economy and that will require inward investment. He's not going to get that without security of tenure. Whilst both are challenged, I would currently rate South Africa as a slightly better investment destination than Tanzania. That said, I am still holding here for the potential to re-rate as the fear trade fades.

12.85p has been paid this morning. Just goes to show that there are placings and placings. If a placing is specifically focused on building value and the market can clearly see this, then the price can respond positively. If a placing is seen as purely related to paying salaries then the reaction is usually negative.

It looks like he is joining as a non-executive so the time commitment will not be that great. It would appear that Tony and Steve come as a job lot.

I think referring to this as the 'profit model's is perhaps somewhat misleading. I believe that something like a 'mutually beneficial' model is more appropriate where all stakeholders benefit from the operation. Clearly the mining company needs to have an incentive to pump in the necessary capital to get the mine operating but there revenue flows should benefit both the miner and the local community equitably. This should also mean ensuring that the environment is not destroyed/is restored as well. Historically a lot of these operations have not been equitable and this is why you get a backlash in some places, such as Tanzania (with Acacia) and, indeed, Indonesia (Grasberg - Freeport). I have absolutely no problem with this model as it leads to a much more harmonious (and profitable) operation.