Member Info for Daisan

Chalky, I think you underestimate us grey hairs! I suspect that you are right that the majority of people buying into cryptocurrencies are in their 20s and 30s over here but the driver has been more in the far east (I believe that Korea was a major contributor to the recent rise). You must also remember that investors of a certain age have been through several market 'fevers' which is why we tend to be somewhat sceptical about the latest 'hot' investment given that they have all ended in the same way. Doesn't mean you can't ride the wave whilst it is happening or invest in those things that come out of the other end (after all, Amazon was a product of the dotcom boom and it seems to have done reasonably well).

Shame on the sellers for selling? That seems a little harsh!

Well, there is little doubt that the whole area became very overheated. If you recall the run up to the '1.6p' day, it was a parabolic move and they always result in a crash. However, that is not the end of the story and I believe that the whole Blockchain system, whilst currently immature, is likely to develop into a significant new area of technology that has considerably further to go. I am not a great fan of these crypto currencies but I would suggest that it is very premature to suggest that the area is dead now. It will come back to life but I have no idea at what point that will be.

Well, cryptos are far from a thing of the past. In fact, there is little doubt that the principles currently being put in place within the cyrpto world will form the basis for transactions in the future - central bank interest is indicative of this. I suspect that many of the current crop of cryptos, particularly the likes of Bitcoin, will die but something new will emerge. I also suspect that we are some way off this and Bitcoin is likely to rise again in the medium term - its history is one of rapid rises followed by eye watering (80%) collapses so the current situation is hardly new. One added fact that suggests that cryptos and, especially, the underlying Blockchain technology is far from dead is the fact that large sums of money are still being raised for speculative plays. You don't find this when something is dying. As such, once the current carnage is over I anticipate a period of choppiness before a new rising trend is established.

Prices predictably marked down across the board today. As you say, not a great day to release decent news. Markets will stabilise but much will depend on the US opening. I suspect that it will open lower and then bounce but it could carry on falling in which case we will see more pressure this afternoon.

It is looking more and more likely that this is the case but if it isn't, we are still left with the situation of a polymetallic near surface ore body at BKZ that is sitting immediately on top of a high grade copper ore body, which is only going to improve the economics of the project.

Chartist2, N4P not hyped? You clearly don't use Twitter! I really hope you don't do this share buying thing for a living as you are increasingly coming across as a novice PI complaining about being caught on a spike. If you can give the moaning a rest for a while, I am sure that most of us would appreciate it.

Seriously? It is up over 200% on a one year time frame. If you set your sights beyond examining the daily movements you might save yourself from a great deal of angst and somewhat nonsensical posts. And given the work currently being carried out, you should prepare yourself for more news, explanatory interviews with Steve and PR. Or company sponsored ramping if you prefer.

Indeed. The potential looks exceptional but there are so many other things going on that require priority over a project that we can't explore currently. When the permit comes through, that will be the time to speculate and salivate!

He has mentioned Baroi many times as the one he is most interested in. I think that it will be some time before anything happens on this given the fact that they are awaiting a forestry permit and the priority of BKM, BKZ and now Beutong. I doubt that it will be this year.

I merely meant that a one day rise may be viewed as a one off but if it continues rising it may well be viewed as a change of trend. There is little doubt that the trend in BTL has been down recently but consecutive rises may give some hope that this is over. Good news can be swallowed up by a downwards trend. LION is an example yesterday - news was announced and the share price rose sharply in the afternoon only to pull back later and it is down a bit today as well.

Possibly waiting to see what happens with BTL. One day jump after a sustained fall may be viewed with suspicion but if it starts rising strongly again today I think that you should see a reaction here.

Pablo2, Thanks for this. I am now even more convinced that this undermines the credibility of the previous regime as it effectively says the position was NOT robust at that time and the resource was overstated. Whilst I can see the difficulty this created, I do not think that they should have restated the resource based on a $1500/oz gold price. This has clearly been done to ensure that the resources did not fall as a result of the revision. This is fast becoming an optionality play on this basis which puts us in a different ball game, but we do know there are economically available resources there at a lower gold price. $1500/oz is not a standard I am familiar with by the way.

Reading it again, it would appear that the most significant difference is the fact that the resource is now constrained to a $1500/oz open pit shell. So, presumably the old resource included material that was outside of the envisaged open pit. You do get the impression that, in order to ensure that the resource has not reduced at Tulkubash, they have played around with some of the other figures (cut off grades and assumed gold price) to come up with an appropriate number. It does now look like the 2018 drill campaign will be the one that gives us a better view as to whether this really is going to be a very large deposit rather than a large one. In the meantime, we will just have to rely on progress associated with the feasibility study/financing/mine development.

Almost. It was 7.04m oz.

It's interesting and somewhat obfuscated! My understanding from this is that they have changed the mining method which has led to less of the resource being economically viable to mine at the previously assumed gold price and cut off grade. So they have reduced the cut off grade and assumed that the gold price is higher ($1500) which has resulted in a broadly consistent resource. However, there is no indication of reserves here which was one of the main targets of the drilling programme for 2017 was it not? Another change is that there is no mention of open pit for the refractory ore. If I was being critical I would suggest that they are moving from something that didn't work to something that does. Which doesn't reflect too well on the previous regime. So, it looks like we will have to wait for the feasibility study for the reserves (at a production run rate of 60k oz per year they should be able to indicate a life of mine of 7 years which is typically what the industry looks for) and the results of the 2018 drilling programme for the potential of the resources to grow to be revealed. I confess that I am somewhat frustrated by this. The recent RNSs have all been pointing towards the drilling programme revealing a significantly expanded resource potential. Or at least that was my (obviously mis-) reading. The potential is obviously still there but it will take longer to reveal itself. On the positive side, this marks the base point for the new regime and they can build on this significantly from here. One can only hope that the 2018 drilling campaign can reveal a lot of the detail before January 2019!

A bit light on specifics, suggesting that this is a 'holding' RNS to remind us that they are still beavering away! The most interesting bing for me here is the 600m drill targeting the magnetic anomaly underpinning BKM/BKZ.

The best laid plans....... OK. That is not quite what I was expecting. I confess that my reading of the previous RNS's led me to believe that the drilling was sufficient to include the pit extension into the resource statement as an inferred item. This is clearly NOT the case and I hold my hand up to the mistake. It would appear that the 2018 programme is being designed for this purpose so we need to wait a year to have confirmation of what we all suspect to be the case. :( I am going to have a look in more detail before commenting further.

I always find it quite frustrating that companies push the deadline to the limit so 'January' becomes 6:30pm on 31st January. Why they can't release it earlier is beyond me or if they are struggling to produce it in time (I suspect that this isn't the case here) then why not just specify a later date when you can deliver it by? I always liked Amara but never invested. It was one of those shares where I was awaiting an entry price that never arrived! From a cursory glance it looks like Perseus is in pretty good shape. With a target annual production of 500k ounces from three mines (that looks to be achievable), the current market capitalisation is likely to rise considerably given a supportive share price. The cash costs/AISC are relatively high so the share price will be disproportionately hit should the gold price soften. Conversely, they should benefit considerably from a rising gold price. I am pretty bullish on gold over the next few years although I wouldn't rule out one more period of weakness before the 'moon shot'!

Interestingly we had another 1m sell this morning and the price has ticked up subsequently. There is obviously a tug in both directions currently but the buy side seems to be outweighing the sell side despite the fact that the sizeable reported trades are on the sell side. Which does support the assertion that there is some significant buy side activity that is currently not being shown.