Member Info for Dip666

Had05 was an anomaly in being lucky in hitting such grades, under cover exploration isn't easy or quick and especially across such large areas with multiple targets, we'll need to learn to wait a few years across multiple drill programs to define if tenements hold something interesting or not.

My interpretation is they haven't hit strong mineralisation that indicates definitive probability of a viable ore body but found enough evidence in pathfinders and the traces they have tied in with their geological understanding to be encouraged enough to warrant continued exploration. I've definitely learnt to wait for assay results and expect multi year campaigns before we might make a strong hit at another exploration tenement that hasn't been explored based on both our campaigns and others I have been watching elsewhere, the quick success with Havieron really does seem very rare.

From my extremely basic understanding much of our Paterson ground along strike is appearing to have the correct structural and chemical characteristics to be viable for another ore body if certain geological events have also taken place over time from results to date. The only way we'll confirm either way is by drilling and trying to use pathfinder analysis etc. to zone in on anything. I think we've definitely found enough evidence from early exploration work from drilling, EM analysis etc. to warrant more work to date on scally and JURI targets, but not enough to say without hesitation there will be something there.

Extract from RNS for key aim going forward in the next phase, this is their business case for continuing as such:
The strong Bi tenor of results at BHRD004 is particularly encouraging, given that Havieron is strongly demarcated by a Bi halo and there is a strong, direct link between Bi and Au in the ore system.  The high Bi and 20 - 100ppb Au zones in BHRD004 indicate significant mineralising fluids (Table 2).  The aim of follow up work will be to identify both a vector to the core of the system and a viable trap site, both of which should they be identified will likely have higher and possibly economic concentrations of gold.

Hi LT,

if you held your shares in an ISA they should have opened up a trading account for you mate, I already had a normal trading acc they opened when my ISA transferred over when they bought out The Share Centre a while back. So they just transferred shares into there from the ISA where I can continue to hold them and I can call them to arrange any trades via asset match if I choose to add or sell. I would call up and see what is going on with yours if you can't see the shares listed in your online account mate :-)

Well, I invested here just under 5 years ago I think as thought it was a good risk/reward long term play and that the Moz govt. should cave in eventually having read about the shenanigans, but been some twists and turns along the way. It was my first foray into an explorer too.
I think TZM coming in and cough cough 'acquiring' and now starting to develop the license have really done us a favour, I spoke to the CEO last year after sending in a translation of a news article about TZM posted by someone here as he thought I was a journo amusingly and wanted to check.
We both agreed that when these kind of dodgy deals are done, the potential legal challenge by rightful owners and a settlement is often priced in by the likes of TZM based on his experiences in business in such jurisdictions lacking much regulation and my own with a property/land case in India our family went through, call it BAU as such!
Looking forward to the 21st and seeing AAG commit to the SPA. I like the way the deal is structured as ensures that AAG will have the budget and incentive to pursue the BIT case in a timely manner, GLA and especially the especially LTH who have had quite the drama here :-)

Are you sure about this LT?

Interactive Investor should have taken your shares if an ISA and place into a normal trading account for you as they have with mine, the text below is the reply they sent to me when I emailed them using secure messaging function about future ability to trade Dev via Asset Match:

We are able to facilitate a trade through Asset Match. There is an additional commission charged by Asset Match, this is either 3% of the trade or £20, which ever is higher. This trade will be placed at phone commission (£49) too.

Hi Geordie, that's right mate, approx 1300m for actual decline development vs passing bays etc. making the other 219m up. So perhaps need to add a few weeks onto the calcs or calculate from 1300m, I've passed onto RA to consider :-)
The ground should continue to improve so Shaun is expecting new record rates of advancement still but he did also indicate there might be some patches that are less ideal as not complete ****genous in one of the interviews but overall the conditions should favour us more from my understanding so for now everything looks on track, DFS should update us on production timelines but obviously a few months off now.

Rational Assessor has updated his calculations in the link below on decline advancement and completion using different advance rates based on the updates we've had to date.
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?p=3699#p3699

Extract from my notes of Liam's latest quarterly update with Shaun in regards to production/revenue timelines still being on track based on latest estimates:
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=650

00:41:51:15 - 00:42:03:09
Liam
Thank you. And nice easy one this one What is the GGP board’s rough estimates for first income from Havieron. Are we still on that same timeline?

00:42:04:17 - 00:42:33:15
Shaun
Yeah. Well, again, I think the pre-feasibility study tells us that the answer to that which you're testing my memory a little bit, but I think that's June 2024. I think the decline advancement that we saw in today's quarterly would give people comfort that we are at least achieving the decline advance rates consistent with that kind of time frame, what I what I'll probably talk to more confidence on is I think we would be in a position to start stoping in early ‘24 and I think yeah, we've previously talked around that first quarter into the first quarter. I don't think there's any information right now that would suggest that more time is needed.

No probs guys, glad it's sorted :-)

Working fine for me, they did recently finally revamp the site (well overdue), make sure you're using the URL below...

https://secure.ii.co.uk/webbroker2/

I've picked out some highlights as well from Liam's Interview ??

Highlights from GGPHelp Interview with Shaun Day Q4 2022 Update - 25 Jan 2023
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=652

Hi Ace, I do think consolidation on a cross listing is fairly likely based on Shaun's statements since ASX started becoming a serious option in various interviews:

https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=551
Excerpt:
*Share Price/Consolidation and ASX Listing
- Shaun favours any consolidation being into a strong market and 10/1 looks to be the most likely ratio from his comments about many peers on ASX being listed with around 400m shares from memory, but not a priority.
- It will happen when it is deemed appropriate and beneficial only. He also didn’t completely rule out issuance of new shares on an ASX listing if an appropriate opportunity of some kind were to present itself.
- Current plan is very much to utilise a Cross Listing for compliance purposes and not issue new shares and hence benefit from ASX linked indices who can then invest either on listing or through the fact there is a pathway being set for ASX beforehand.
- AIM provides a great following and liquidity, no plans to delist here.

https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=592
Excerpt:
Shaun
So, we continue to think and I think an ASX listing is positive for Greatland. I think in a couple of ways, I think it broadens the base of potential investors and the reality is for an Australian asset in a large investable pool of money that is available and some of it is dedicated to resources in Australia… I think being able to access that capital makes a huge amount of sense.

And a lot of those, those funds are mandate locked for ASX listed vehicles. So having that ASX listed vehicle will enable them to invest and we even... a number of them their mandate work as long as there's a publicly stated intent to list within 12 months, some of those the mandates will already allow them to invest. And we saw that a little bit in, I think the August equity rise.

But so, I think for that reason that makes a lot of sense. It's also very useful because it gives us a you know, script in the Australian ASX market. So, there's something that's a natural fit say you know, some additional Paterson holdings for script rather than cash. That might be something that we want to do, which is a lot easier with Australian paper with other Australian shareholders rather than asking them to accept London paper.

So, there is a couple of reasons to do it. And then I think the, the second part of your question was around an equity raise and whether that would cause dilution. Again, I would steer you towards there are different ways to ASX list. A lot of what I just described or in fact both of what I just described is achieved with what I'll call a compliance listing, which is listing in Australia but not actually raising any equity.

Notes from GGPHelp Interview with Shaun Day Q4 2022 Update - 25 Jan 2023

As Paddy says a lot of important insights around such areas such as TSX compliance influencing DFS I was unaware of and of course why the DFS delay may not suit us as PI's with Havieron as GGP's primary focus but NCM deem important for their own needs.

https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=650

Here is a link to Liams latest quarterly review with Shaun, longer form than just the 5 minute exploration review he shared earlier in week.

https://youtu.be/vjuurXQdPC0

Freddie, you have never had any trust or intention of a long term investment, you just got trapped expecting scally to hit so you could trade it IMO and no issue with me as not like I have never traded short term before but take ownership of your own mistakes. You got caught out as did those if us who didn't take advantage of the 2020 surge, all you can do is make a plan b, mine is hold into production and then decide on what I do. When circumstances change you need to adapt, much as Shaun seems to be doing now but important PR lesson for him, don't promise a transformative 6 to 9 months in an asset you do not control in future...
And while I am suggesting I sense his strategy and approach has changed of late I personally haven't suggested doomsday or honeymoon scenarios. We need to see how things play out and also if Shaun shares some thoughts around this on next visit but abundantly clear that for the present the plan is to be in harmony with NCM.
I do agree however not to hero worship any MD or CEO as sometimes what is best for a company to prosper or survive is not the best for shareholders and ultimately Shaun has to think of the company above shareholders so always remain critical and defensive on your own interests.
I have a clear idea in my head what I want to see in the next 3 to 5 years to see if he can build a company and if he doesn't make the right moves I'll take my money elsewhere quietly for better gains. A real chance here to do something special with GGP but it will be a 5 to 10 year journey minimum to get to a solid foundation that might be the next Northern Star and as we have seen, pros and cons in piggybacking NCM to start the journey.
Spend less time b*tching at fellow investors and attend a town hall or email or call the company, take your frustrations out on the people who run the company, gets boring reading your attacks on other posters and why I fire back at likes of you.

As you say Strudel, Shaun found out from those attending the last Town Hall and also why I think since then NCM/GGP might have agreed to be in lockstep moving forward, it is what needs to happen in a true partnership.
It isn't an equal one though so NCM will decide how and when catalysts are initiated - but well... they are the majority owners. Perhaps GGP will be the big brother one day to an junior partner.

Unfortunately Shaun did state that if NCM didn't release an MRE in Feb then GGP would consult with NCM first, if NCM were planning to release the DFS later in Q2 rather than earlier then GGP would PROBABLY release an MRE. He didn't give a cast iron guarantee but did suggest it was likely...

I agree with Kevin that an MRE would help underpin the value but also with Bamps it would not at this stage/sentiment be much of a rise in SP if any. You can't share an asset for decades without being in lockstep though, so this is the way it has to be if we intend to have a good partnership, I don't believe it is normal practice for a minority asset owner to publish their own MRE's (?) but then again, NCM haven't been the best of partners in all respects.

Something seems to have changed where now it's become 'we prefer to be aligned' narrative vs we'll just do our own MRE.. perhaps an agreement to be in lockstep going forward with the new (Interim) CEO so Shaun has had to change tact? Perhaps he can be more open at a Town Hall in March when next in London informally than in public interviews.

The benefits of piggy backing NCM are aplenty including accelerated development, easier funding as majority of costs/risks and capabilities that NCM provide make it easier for us BUT as we are all learning we are very much passengers as minority owners. We saw that the JVA locked us into abysmal metrics for use in the so called FMV exercise but despite this our team managed to save the day with the independent MRE and case put forward to the independent assessor.

One thing is now abundantly clear to me, GGP absolutely MUST pursue M&A/Royalty type models (perhaps once in FCF) to generate other revenue channels and perhaps also develop our own either sole or majority owned asset if a viable ore body found to attempt to become the next Northern Star. We're just passengers at Hav although we must not forget it is amazing to have that lack of responsibility to obtain the revenue (potentially for many decades) to then go ahead and be able to build the company upon BUT this will take years not months and be an up and down journey. The old ATH is in the rear view mirror, we must accept that and move on :-)

@Culpepper- the funding agreed has been planned around what is expected by the team to come within the DFS not what was outlined in PFS .

Notes from GGPHelp Interview with Shaun Day Q3 2022 Update - 03 Nov 2022
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=592

Liam
Absolutely. And the other news and probably the elephant in the room for most shareholders is that Newcrest announced they would like to delay the feasibility study. What's the reason for this and what are the benefits for GGP with it being delayed?

Shaun
....but I'd like to highlight that we kind of planned for that. We went out there, we did the equity, we did the debt, we didn't fund the PFS, cost of CapEx, we funded our view on an enlarged Havieron and gave ourselves a really neat buffer. So, I think that in essence the benefit is seeing a better more realistic Havieron… is a better outcome for shareholders.

Liam
I think you've just answered my next question there, but I think I'll ask it anyway. Should the feasibility study grow the resource and a new mine plan be published alongside it, which shows that more than 3 million tonnes per annum can be extracted with a second dedicated decline will GGP be able to meet the additional expenditure required.

... And then finally, you kind of drifted in there to the funding element. Well, again, I think we've disclosed to the market, yeah, we had the 2 million tonne PFS, but we all knew it was looking at trying to create a 3 million tonne feasibility study. So, in our internal models, in terms of engagement with the bank, we really focused on that larger mine being the 3 million tonnes.

So and again we've kind of prebaked that additional capital of debt and equity and you know, we're keen to finalize the study so we can say that with complete confidence, but we feel we're incredibly well positioned for it.

@Culpepper - when exactly did you invest again... as saying Shaun or rather more accurately that the GGP team didn't do anything particularly remarkable around the 5% option exercise is completely bonkers IMO mate...
Without GGP's own MRE and stalwart case for the independent valuation we'd have had a ridiculously low valuation win the process which NCM would happily have picked up the 5% for (an amount that wouldn't have covered CAPEX for even the PFS perhaps )including leaving us with a real difficulty in obtaining financing with that 'price discovery event' becoming the official marker for value at that time. I suspect we'd have already been looking at being snapped up for peanuts had that all played out the way NCM wanted.
It is very much the teams own MRE and ability to explain and communicate the asset to Wyloo and the banks that enabled us to close the funding for so much money and with these Tier 1 level partners, banks and attract the directors we have.
Perhaps try posting less and spend less time critiquing the input of those of us who collaborate to analyse and research the company properly and try applying some time to learning and researching the stock you're invested in more thoroughly before making such sweeping statements :-)

Perhaps start here:
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=365

https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=127

Hi Z, as Kevin says whatever has happened of late, Shaun is talking about aligning with NCM's timetable around MRE than releasing our own now. Perhaps teamwork approach agreed now option exercise done and dusted with the new interim CEO at NCM but still means they drive the catalysts and release dates
Offshoot is that the DFS might now be released later in Q2 around the MRE in August rather than sooner given we're expecting the DFS to work from the MRE data, what is key though is that as long as the production timeline doesn't move back it shouldn't be an issue although I have sympathy for anyone financially distressed needing to sell.
In theory a more thorough DFS with a longer life of mine should be worth the wait, especially if it it pushes Hav into Tier 1 status which then drives more insto interest towards production alongside the reasons stated in Bamps posts earlier. It is very frustrating we seem to be pushing these major milestones/catalysts back again given we expected to be enjoying the 2nd leg of Lassonde Curve by now... so I am as annoyed as others at the constant shifting of goal posts.
Certainly I'll be tweaking my strategy for future exploration to production journeys in future... if I can be bothered to go through it all again :-)

https://youtu.be/8uFNNhwFOwE

Shaun Day joins Liam once again for a recap, of the quarter, and gives his view of the 31st Drill results (released on 24th January 2022

Replay is live now:

https://www.investormeetcompany.com/investor/meeting/investor-presentation-234