Member Info for Dip666

my response:

thank you for the response, i understand the obligations through rns’s but hope some increase in interviews is also considered, especially with an ability to submit questions.

these formats assist in clarifying and elaborating on progress and addressing solutions for potential or existing issues and serve as a useful pr tool imo. perhaps an interview presenting the dfs when it is released will help existing and potential investors understand the han**** project and it’s potential more readily for instance.

I think when you paste text into LSE site it removes all the caps when you post BTW, seems like some bug so will email in

hi 5x5 ... i just got a reply so as you said really :-)

does seem as if they are intending to increase comms on an ad-hoc basis though but perhaps really just rns updates so will reply that although i get this the benefits of interviews are that they can clarify and elaborate on progress vs dry rns's etc.....

_______________________

thank you for your email.

the answer to your questions are as follows:

the dfs has commenced and we anticipate it concluding during the course of this year, but cannot give a specific date given that the process involves external consultants. as progress is made and results realised through this process, updates will be communicated.

our obligation to provide details on performance rights and obligations is contained within our rns’s.

the new board and management is committed to unlocking value and creating shareholder returns across the suite of assets alien holds. work is ongoing in this sense and as and when we can update, we will.

as you will have seen from friday’s announcement, there is a new team that has been put in place to take the company into its next phase of development, operations and monetisation. you can expect to see an increase in communication as we work through this exciting period.

_________________

response was to my email below:

i have some general questions as a shareholder to gain an understanding of progress on various topics as to be frank communicating with your retail investors seems to have become a lesser priority.

1/ potential timeframe for dfs completion and bringing han**** into production including a general update on progress and an explanation on why you have moved the timelines multiple times now, what issues or rationale supported or resulted in these changes to project plans?

2/ why set december 2025 for han**** to be operational as a performance option for troy, seems overly generous to some or an indication that cy 2024 may not be a feasible target for some reason to achieve production?

3/ in fact can you summarise which employees now hold which performance rights and options given the amount of staff turnover?

4/ strategy and plans for eh/mm considering rod came onboard with a specific interest in, focus and plan for these projects?

5/ likelihood of a future raise given han**** looks delayed into 2024 now?

6/ could you make a commitment to some kind of regular update to your investors, even if only quarterly?

Why are some of you so obsessed with Max saying something negative for once, that's never happening and even if he did, what exactly would change? I don't understand the obsession personally, Chris2 is hardly likely to say something positive either is he?! :-)

Just filter Max if you find him annoying, hardly likely his posts have effected the SP over the last few years in any way, anyone with a substantial investment here is no doubt wisely making their own efforts. Plenty of iron ore forecasts out there for instance that you can read for yourself as it's the forecasts that matter, not the price over a few days right now- although always good to see how current fluctuations fit into forecasts.

Also... this 'billions in the ground' so our real value is X approach is so oft quoted in this sector but I've realised that you have to prove up projects through exploration and resource estimates to JORC standard AND show an ability to get them financed and operational or divest to provide shareholder value. When the 'market' believes UFO are capable and production has a more confirmed and closer timeline alongside funding having been secured, we should see a rerate and of course asset prices, supply and demand dynamics, costings and other macro factors will influence the rerate too. The DFS will be very useful to evaluate everything so looking forward to it.

p.s no reply yet on my request for updates and comms from Alien (unsurprisingly) so will chase up now and advise others also do the same as the more pressure to improve in these areas, the more likely to get a response IMO :-)

Probably correcting the title as mixed up with Chalice Mining and uploading again in a while mate, was just going to watch myself too...

Perhaps someone like Ned would have more access to insider knowledge if a raise incoming and bide his time too mate :-)

I'm not sure about Sisku's claims - an M&A related raise on ASX listing wouldn't be so easily leaked I would assume as we've not seen leaks before around GGP and that press article was as speculative as you can get...

I've looked through his posting history and just seems like a typical investor than someone within the industry being paid to present at industry events to me.

A ramp or deramp IMO can in often be defined as a highly speculative claim predicting a certain scenario of very significant material effect to a company made with no supporting evidence or reliance on known facts. I'm not closing my mind to a potential raise or M&A related to ASX - but very doubtful anyone posting on chat forums is privy to these events :-)

@MH01 - Probably tomorrow now I think, am keeping an eye on their video content in anticipation albeit not expecting any 'revelations' :-)

Hi sand - GGP had no issue when creating their own MRE to end up within 1% range of the NCM update that did follow eventually. When a project is majority owned by an international corporation I imagine this sector is no different to any in that you should always expect conservative updates and forecasts in reporting?

I'd be surprised if GGP followed up an MRE update on Friday with their own MRE due to finding it underwhelming. I imagine if so, then Shaun will just explain the data cut-off is earlier than GGP would have chosen or the methodology/metrics used for the calcs are far too conservative and he'd show some projections with higher values in a follow-up presentation after the MRE release.

We do need to play clever with new partners soon and not seem as if we might be difficult partners and very team orientated, we're very close to DFS/DTM now as the official green lighting of the project. We need to be astute and wait to see how Newmont act as new owners, also what their plans are for Hav/Telfer and then make our play IMO if needed.

Whether Newcrest or Newmont in future, the MRE's are always going to be what many consider 'conservative' :-)

Juniors aren't as restrained by the same restrictions and responsibilities large corporations have in their reporting and forecasting. I'm pretty sure we'll see the expected CAGR in relation to whatever data cut-off they end up using, so it should be a decent update, especially given the amount of time lapsed since the last MRE.

I'm still hesitant in expecting a huge and sustained rerate though with just an MRE update in this market, think we'll need to see the ASX listing and DFS/DTM to really help propel us back nearer a better level. Hope I'm wrong but I'm treating the MRE update as a great fundamental value builder that will aid a price rerate in conjunction with other key events in the next 6-12 months.

I think the 'market' already has a pretty good idea of what to expect in the update and indeed in Havieron being another Telfer sized deposit with decades of mining ahead, so will be interesting to see if we get some volume or not before Thursday evening.

Well mate, some big claims from you to date such as the one below after that press article suggesting a raise on ASX was a given around the time you started posting here that I recalled as soon as I saw your latest post...

"My understanding is this, a placing will happen at the upper end of the published scale. The funds will be used to secure a substantial acquisition that will fundamentally change the landscape for Greatland Gold."

Surely you can understand some scepticism given you are not willing to back up your claims to be very close to the Industry and privy to such facts (if they are facts of course).

TBF it is very feasible you could just be a ramper in theory claiming suck knowkedge based on posting history to date, there is nothing in your posts to verify your knowledge or presence at events.

Personally I don't care as unless someone is willing to verify themselves if claiming to be an industry insider etc. as such, I won't lose any sleep over it or put much weight on such claims to feed into my decisions.

Hi bamps\zoros,

Maybe the confusion is a bit on first ore being considered as an early stage of 'production' before hitting full commercial production ... or at least I thought it was in my lack of knowledge about that side of things.

Maybe would be good to get a definitive list of the stages in our heads and correct terminology as for most of us first timers on a production journey it can get a bit confusing, I'd have to check but think at some stage Shaun might have stated full commercial production in June which is of course heading into Q3 if late June.

Truth is a few weeks/months won't matter in 2024 as once works continued on past getting to the top of the ore body with decline, as that will have convinced even the most nervous that we are going mining I would think :-))

Great post Panama :-)

Whatever anyone's opinions are about the outcomes after expected catalysts we do have strong clues now IMO of when to expect most major catalysts... always unexpected developments (good or bad ) that can shake things up but here's what I expect right now:

- Aug 11 we should get an updated MRE from NCM (likely we will IMO) and if we don't see one published then GGP plan to release their own in weeks ahead (but will run it past NCM), I think GGP want this to hand for the ASX listing

- In Liam's interview Shaun expressed that they plan to have lodged applications/prospectus related to the ASX Cross Listing by end of September. Given there is a proposed company reorganisation that GGP plan to accompany this (Oz TopCo etc.), we should have this proposed to shareholders to vote on before Q4 to enable that structure to be put in place

- If the above goes to plan for GGP then I expect the ASX Cross listing to go live 6-8 weeks into Q4 if submitted by end of Q3, we can't fully discount that there may be a raise associated with it, but at this present time we haven't been informed of one

- NCM/NEM deal is planned to complete before year-end and NEM have articulated a plan to inform the market of their optimisation plans in Feb 2024, so I expect that unless NEM are considering divestment of Hav/Telfer they'll execute the DFS/DTM before Feb 2024 while Havieron goes through the expected development plan for production to commence during H1 2024.

Below is Zoro's latest roadmap to help you build your own forecast against your own assumptions on key events :-)

https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=564

14/05/21. Decline commences. (460m deep / 2800m long).

15/07/21. Mine officially started.

03/03/22. GGP MRE2 published. [5.5mozAu / 218ktCu: 6.5mozAuEq].

05/23. Farm in with Rio Tinto @ Paterson South. $7m exploration costs by 2030. $21m by 2033.

Q3/23. Scallywag and Juri assay results.

07/08/23. Diggers and Dealers Mining Forum Presentation.

Q3/23. GGP ASX.

11/08/23. NCM Annual Results. NCM MRE(2) or GGP MRE(3)?

Q4/23. Exploration decline and ventilation shafts complete.

26/10/23. NCM September Quarterly results

Q1/24. F.S. Followed by Decision to mine. [May be delayed by company acquisition].

Q1/24. Sub Level Open Stoping (SLOS) construction commences.

Q1/24. SLOS first Ore. First cash flow.

Q3/24. Bulk production of Gold/Copper.

09/09/25. Co-invested Options (held by ‘new directors’ 9/22), tradable.

Q3/26. Possibly 2 Bulk Underground Mines (E Breccia and N Breccia?).

2028. B.U.M production. Operating in tandem with SLOS.

2036. SLOS estimated end of life based on: (4.2MozAuEq / 3Mt/yr / 12 years).

2053+. B.U.M estimated end of life.

Thx STR and will do, been holding since around mid 2020 here as came across looking for silver exposure via EH but also decided I liked the iron ore projects and pgm's at MM, posted a lot on GGP as been peeps like Bamps to learn from but do hold other stocks like here , most boards trolled so badly these days that I post less and less now like many :-)

certainly a feasible theory prospector if he has to wait until then to exercise them ...mind you i'd want him gone if he needs that length of time to develop han**** but if he has to wait until then to exercise then yes fair enough :-)

dec 2024 seems reasonable for eh\mm for divestment, jv or development as more work on mm especially would attract a better deal or sale if not planning on sole development which formerly was unlikely as ufo favours deals in the more common pathway for explorers, but perhaps some comms on planned drill programs would be a good bit of comms too.

what interviews partly assist with is communicating the reasoning behind certain decisions to help win investors onside or clarify any grey areas and also talk through things in more detail and perhaps answer questions if taking them live via webinar vs just from the interviewer or host.

System has removed the caps for some reason... a bug I've noted before...

Anyways have a good w'end all, hopefully less rain than down my way and try and we should all try and remember most of us are on the same side :-))

does it really matter tacet... anyway, here's what i've sent in and will be chasing up as time allows during week:

i have some general questions as a shareholder to gain an understanding of progress on various topics as to be frank communicating with your retail investors seems to have become a lesser priority.

1/ potential timeframe for dfs completion and bringing han**** into production including a general update on progress and an explanation on why you have moved the timelines multiple times now, what issues or rationale supported or resulted in these changes to project plans?

2/ why set december 2025 for han**** to be operational as a performance option for troy, seems overly generous to some or an indication that cy 2024 may not be a feasible target for some reason to achieve production?

3/ in fact can you summarise which employees now hold which performance rights and options given the amount of staff turnover?

4/ strategy and plans for eh/mm considering rod came onboard with a specific interest in, focus and plan for these projects?

5/ likelihood of a future raise given han**** looks delayed into 2024 now?

6/ could you make a commitment to some kind of regular update to your investors, even if only quarterly?

Looking into the Valmin Code and different valuation methods and learning more about MRE’s and how they’re built helped me a great deal in understanding it’s way more than ‘there’s billions in the ground’ approach some investors in this sector adopt and in a negative market, you really need to be near production / divestment to attract attention.

You need to verify what you have through MRE’s and commercial value is gained through them , you need to prove you have the financial and operational ability to get ‘it’ out of the ground too. Asset prices, market sentiment, company sentiment also factor into the SP vs what your personal opinion is of fundamental ‘value’. Part of the management teams job is to ensure that the ‘market’ understands and appreciates the assets and see’s a clear pathway to production and faith in the team running the company, see a strong and stable team being put in place.

My opinion on Alien’s approach to investor relations and communicating a clear strategy and timelines is a pretty dismal 3 out of 10 at the minute so I’ll be trying to get in touch to give them my opinion this drastically needs to change and something I expect as a shareholder. Excellent assets and I have a positive outlook but as a shareholder I want improvements on the above. The best way to try and get them to improve is try and get in touch and share your thoughts, I’ll definitely be emailing them and perhaps try to call in the week. let them know directly if you’re unhappy about anything is my advice.

Freddo, he's saying some are building the narrative it is guaranteed and a given but that is inaccurate surely, how can anyone without insider knowledge know whether there is one planned at this stage? When you look at some (not all) of those posters they're done more in a style to discourage and cause fear Vs sharing a reasoned opinion and building the case for why it's 100% certain.

It wasn't confirmed one way or another by Shaun because quite simply it can't be ruled out at this stage but neither is it guaranteed and IF one is proposed he has said that it would be fully explained and expected to be accretive in nature so fundamentally it should add shareholder value, which of course will be individual interpretation IF this scenario takes shape.

The simple truth is no one can be certain yet.

Common! Talk for yourself Lambinator :-))

As for the AFR quote, deffo as JerryS says a lot of assumptions based on little evidence, we'll see what plans Newmont start to articulate in or before their planned Feb timeline for public communication on the path forward with their enlarged portfolio of assets post completion of the Newcrest acquisition.

A very very open field until them IMO on what they might do with Hav/Telfer, (Continue JVA/Sell/Buy) as they've really not committed to publicly stating intentions to date. In the meantime that decline is still being worked on and other accompany infrastructure developments and administrative tasks to ensure all approvals etc. will be in place are in full swing too.

Max tends to look at the positives only but I don't have an issue as he's not duplicitous - he is what he is. He often gets some interesting info. up I can read and make my own conclusions of, he isn't analytical and unbiased enough for me to value some of his opinions on some things but I appreciate the info. It's preferable to some out and out trouble makers- which are not to be confused with dissatisfied and genuine shareholders and plenty here due to the initial timelines given - but a few of us always suggested these might be optimistic while remaining positive about the investment as two separate areas.

Production seems unlikely until 2024 but a DFS seems appropriate as per the norm for closing funding and perhaps to show potential clients to assure of the project viability, they'll want to ensure that orders can be fulfilled with a new mining operation and supplier - why wouldn't they? Also, just to clarify by 'new data' to be included in the DFS I meant I'd expect a more recent data cutoff to help grow the resource size and LOM potentially if enough data to fulfil JORC standards which would aid funding too perhaps. Costings would now also be far far more up to date than the Scoping Study which is quite outdated now and while we've had inflation, we've also had some cooling down of it and many solutions being put in place to negate some of the inflationary pressures the industry is experiencing.

It's a simple choice really, do you think they'll achieve required funding and approvals to then commence production in 2024 or a suitable timescale for your investment outlook? If you do, then you stay invested or come in as a new investor (great entry point for anyone positive on outcome and just looking in in theory) and if you don't see the milestones being achieved then you either lessen your exposure or exit. So it's a useful RNS to help you decide what you're going to do - whether you find it positive or negative :-)