Member Info for DiamondGeazer

I bought half my position in Arc M around this time 2 years ago at exactly this price, 3.8p and Cu was around USD6,500 a tonne, and we were "hoping" for a deal with AA. Shows how market sentiment has changed when we are (should be) only 5 days from signing a (superb) deal we already know the terms of and Cu is higher. Unless a lot of investors don't believe this will actually happen, and I'm not quite sure why they would believe that, I can only assume its the uncertainty of whether we have to wait another 90 days to complete the JV terms that is holding this back. I accept there are major fears about a recession and markets are down, even so, I find it being below 4p at this moment utterly baffling (which is still substantially below the price I paid for my second purchase!). GLA Arc LT holders!

3G, I again agree with your summation. What may turn out to be ironic is that even if we don't get the costs figures until the H1 results (which I understand have to be published before the end of Sept), we wouldn't actually be due any update on production since June until the Q3 figs are published in (9th?) October, which means at the results, they will have to deal with the elephant in the room - how much have we produced since June, 10 days+ before they publish the actual numbers. Could have been done differently.

Thanks Spero, I had pressed post message before I saw your reply. Still think they don't have any understanding about the importance of news flow.

3G, I agree, they are probably listening to their new Canadian bankers telling them that when they list on the TSX, Canadian institutions only need qtrly reports and ignoring our track record and the fact that Aim is a news driven market. I know we don't have costs yet but I have come to the conclusion that this management only like to put out info when it is good news.

But on another note, it what Spero says is true, and I have no reason to doubt him, isn't it important to let investors know that 10% of the value of 2,000+ tonnes of Cu processed in H1 and the resultant cash generated was not paid in H1 ... isn't that price sensitive information which would at least benefit from a short RNS/press release about the shipment being loaded... and generate some news?

Spero, thank you very much - I certainly was unaware of that, and I looked but hadn't been able to find an explanation of how RMM got paid on the website.

Also means I presume, that we should knock up to 10% off the expected number for cashflow generated in H1, because for the Cu now on this ship, it only gets paid now, i.e. in H2?

...or Analytical, or Xenor???? any thoughts?

and to re-iterate what Nonsence says... "Earth calling Cornish, come in please!"

Sorry Poundstopennies, not so... the Company decided that they would move to quarterly reporting, so we won't get new Q3 numbers until early October. But whenever they report, it doesn't solve my problem; they would still report concentrate tonnage production, and saleable copper tonnage... it may be priced when it arrives at the port, but how do we get saleable copper if for months the copper has just been sitting in concentrate form in the port warehouse (and when do we therefore get paid), and if its shipped more regularly, where on earth do 8,000 tonnes of concentrate suddenly come from?

Bondy123 and Pandy, on a BB that can sometimes be utterly vitriolic, how good to see two very respectful but extremely fair posts.

Whatever the disappointments (and I am holding a big loss), I am completely against the personal attacks on AB - with fast changing technology and global supply chain issues, its never going to be easy and its not as though he is intentionally failing to deliver. I will keep my holding until the end of the year and to remain longer, AB needs to deliver actual orders for 30-50 units sold/leased in H2, and then we can then all breath a sigh of relief and the SP can head north. Until then, we need to give him space to do his job; insulting him is also insulting all of us who still back him.

Hi all,

Share price drifting up... maybe someone knows something we re not privy too... time will tell, or maybe we're going to announce we've just got historic weather maps for Dundas!

Unless they have made another SNUFU, which is entirely possible, between now and the end of the year, we should get some funding and development news on Dundas, but watch out for how the timelines slip again.

I should think myself slightly lucky, so i thought I would explain why! I was hugely excited by the drilling programme for Disko, and on the Friday 8th April, the SP slipped a bit and I decided that if it hung around those levels on the Monday, I was going to take the opportunity to double my position. Except I woke up on the Monday 11th to see the mind-blowing announcement that only 3 weeks after they had said they would be doing the diamond drilling at Disko, they would now only be doing it in 2023. I was sufficiently appalled by what I then regarded as the completely misleading March RNS followed by the April drilling postponement, that I didn't buy the shares...

If that RNS had been just a day later... I would have bought the shares and now be suffering an even bigger loss. A bullet dodged possibly. You couldn't make this up.

Could someone please help me here, because I think I am completely misunderstanding this.

In June 2022, the company produced 2,347 tonnes of Cu Concentrate. In the whole of H1 2022, RMM produced 10,084 tonnes of Cu Concentrate containing "2,634 tonnes of saleable metal", and if we are optimistic about July, we should have produced another 2,600 tonnes of concentrate containing 700 tonnes of copper.

So in the first 7 months of this year, we should have produced 12,684 tonnes of concentrate (containing around 3,334 of Cu). So if this ship really does have 8,000 tonnes of RMM's Cu Concentrate (which would contain approx 2,000 tonnes+ of Cu), has the last 4 or 5 months concentrate production just been sitting there all this time?

Any help gratefully received!

Analytical, 3G, Xenor, Matesrates...etc.

I Just glanced at the BB and thought I would make the (not-meant-to-sound-condescending) observation that the reasoned debate you are currently having while still showing respect for different opinions is the main reason I thoroughly enjoy this BB.

Hi NorEscO.

if you are saying that the company isn't very good... no let me more frank... is sometimes krap in communicating and always overegging it, yes I agree. And what you also say below is correct; they made it very clear the legal case was without any merit whatsoever, and then they turn on a sixpence and say its important to settle, without really explaining why they have changed their minds. Once again; I agree. BUT they changed their mind for exactly the right reasons for all of us, even if they weren't very clever about explaining why, and we wouldn't be where we are if they hadn't. With the JV, the management may have only done one thing right..., but its the single most important thing they could have done.

I also agree there is too little comms with "all" shareholders, and too many emails to individuals. And some people on this BB can be harsh; Fulmar and Seisnav are complete optimists who've drunk the cool aid, and I think sometimes they are unnecessarily offensive when someone quite reasonably raises a point they don't agree with, but they also sometimes provide some incredibly insightful and detailed info into the operations which we would never get elsewhere. Can they be condescending; yes. Do they understand genuine LTHs who are suffering: not really. Are they rampers who push the SP up... well if that is their sole purpose, they are not very good at it.

But what I'm at a loss to understand is what you are trying to achieve. You're not saying the JV partner is the wrong one, or the deal is a bad deal. You could have argued that the deal has taken much longer to progress than we were originally led to believe, and that might have been true, but you don't seem to be saying that either. You just seem to be intent on proving that this is a bad company, with bad prospects and bad management, and those who are too over optimistic are misleading everyone else and are here for the wrong reasons, and us LTHs either believe the optimists who lie or are stupid. So why are you here? GLA DYOR.

If you have a different reason, please share it.

Zero "chance" of this not being signed, not "change". apologies.

Hi Teaye72, I relooked at AA's JV with Luminex resources in 2018 which is not dissimilar with ours, and when they signed the LOI and 5 months later (the time period laid out in the LOI RNS for DD), it was Luminex which put out the RNS saying it was signed - AA didn't comment on either occasion. For a major of their size, I don't see that as a surprise so maybe we will just get a very positive RNS from Arc on or round the 10th Aug (I see zero change of this not being signed). But I am also hoping AA and the Zambia Govt may want to "big up" this commitment to Zambia, so maybe we'll get a lot more coverage which would be very helpful, but the reality is that how it is announced doesn't make much difference to the long-term value proposition. Whatever happens, the important point is that as each day passes... the drilling gets ever closer... and the Copper in the ground isn't going anywhere!

sorry, my maths is out, the SP is down by 71%.

It slightly horrifying, but since the Kobold JV was announced almost a year ago, the share price is now down by 81% (15.4p to 4.4p). Yes... commodity prices are weaker and the stock markets are down and there are lots of headwinds... but obviously we have moved on a year in our development.... except that's the problem; we seem to have done absolutely nothing.

If the day they released the news of the JV, they had told investors that exactly a year later, Dundas would neither have a usable feasibility study nor any funding, Enonkoski would have finished last years drilling and the drill results sent to assay... but we wouldn't be shown them... we had announced a drilling programme this year with Kobold and then only 3 weeks later announced we wouldn't actually be drilling... but otherwise we'd be doing lots of soil sampling which we have been doing for years and we are very good at... you would have been laughed out of court. But that's basically where we are... oh yes, we've also produced some youtube videos.

But worst of all is the communication. It’s one of the extraordinary things I found throughout my career; a non-mining person never tells a mining engineer how to do their job; a non-geologist never tells a geologist how to do their job; a non-financial person never tells the finance person how to do their job... but when that mining engineer, that geologist or that finance person gets to the top of a company, or is made a director... they always think they are instantly qualified to know how to communicate with investors, and all too often, they have absolutely no idea. That seems to describe our BoD to a T.

Our mkt cap is still £45m+. With this BoD, that means we can still fall even further.

Apologies Pedro... I have just checked in the April 2022 IR presentation (page 11), and it said new diamond drill results will be announced end June, but the May presentation doesn't mention this but lists the drilling for the whole year... so I haven't a clue!.

Hi Pedro57. I don't have any indication re the timing of the next drill results, but what we do know is when the next information has to be released, and my best guess for updated drill results are they are likely to be released around then. AiM rules say that interim results have to be released within 3 months of the period end (there was a one month extension because of Covid, but I presume that no longer applies), so we will get Interims before the end of September, and Q3 production numbers sometime on October.... and in the meantime, other than the copper price, we are now unlikely to hear anything else, and with a question mark hanging over the costs, unlikely an ii will show interest.

Aim tends to be an event driven market at the best of times, and sensible companies look at how to release a steady flow of RNS's to give analysts a reason to write about them and investors new information to keep them interested... more so in this market with a company with our track record, that's what we should be doing, not pretending we are Rio Tinto and will just release quarterly results.

There have been some very reasonable arguments about whether it was right or wrong to stop monthly production reporting. But given our track record, the price of CU/state of the markets, and the lack of cost info/knowledge (as FreetheCaterham7 points out) that the previous CFO didn't really know what he was doing (and why did it take the BoD so long to notice?), I think that it is a huge own goal to stop reporting monthly and remove any news flow at this moment in time. But as I still maintain, one of their greatest weaknesses is that TB and his team do not understand the nature of AiM or how best to communicate with investors.

One additional point I would make is that having taken the decision to stop releasing monthly reporting, deliver the Q3 target production and its not such a big issue... but God help their reputation if we have an incident that hits production in Q3 and we only hear about it in late September/early October.

Genuine apologies for posting so much today but thought I would also point out that since the copper high of 7th March, our share price is down from 29.25p to 16.20p, a fall of 45%. The SP of FTSE100 copper miner Antofagasta, with a mkt cap of £9.8billion, has fallen from £17.99 to £9.95... also a fall of 45%. Painful it may be, but us Ramblers are more than holding our own in this market.