Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/582663a7bebafb7de35e3db9/1565034713536-GUIJDR7OQR3YM8EJHV5N/Gold_bullion_2.jpg?format=2500w
half of one of those
Lets be clear, the 1000g/T is of concentrate
The material sieved from the spoil heap and put into the processing plant is about 1.6g Au / T
There is estimated to be 4000 T of it so I'd expect 6400 g Au from the fines. at today's spot gold price then approximately £300k
For this reason and given the regulatory effort in getting permissions to mine etc, then would it not make sense, given the relatively small volumes to try to set aside some of the larger visible quartz and put it through a crusher as a secondary programme.
@Crippen24
Are you using the bio fuel produced next to the tug berth at Immingham ?
@Maplinman
I found myself in the same boat, sold just after consolidation at a small but reasonable profit and kept monitoring the stick since. What is the source of the information that substantiates statements on here that the IP is unprotected ?
Some years ago first equity wrote a broker research note which I thought anchored a lot of the speculation on valuation. Since then, Brockham has been disposed of and the Greenland assets have been spun out and progressed. Clogau has seen some good progress on the modelling front but has encountered a setback with respect to dewatering. Nevertheless other free draining targets exist.
Is it time for another research note ? Particularly as the capital structure with respect to Greenland assets has changed so much ? My personal preference is , when arriving at a fundamental valuation is to consider net asset value factoring in timings of income streams and required investments, together with some view on risk. It is appropriate, even if proven reserves are sold on to others to develop.
The goldfield project reward for risk is down mainly to regulatory approval as opposed to presence of gold, which I am very confident of .
Scotalba "but they wont be doing any of that now" ... well they should. Just because one avenue's timescales is in the hands of others is no reason not to drive a trial adit. The first target at 25m and the second a further 30m. It would be a good time to iron out any teething problems with what is after all basic mining.
What ALBA and GROC have are some mineral assets with huge potential. ALBA's further expoloration has been frustrated by NRW however the stance the company and GF have taken is one of constructive engagement. What else would you rather they do ? Throw their toys out of the pram ?
I however believe that other avenues could and should have been pursued sooner. Namely the underground bulk sampling of target zones already identified. The reason I hold this view is that for a fairly modest investment of cash and time a proven underground resource could be reliably confirmed, which, on its own would not provide full substantiation of the mine's future viability , but it certainly would be a vindication of the drill ahead strategy. That would in itself , confer a greater credibility to other identified targets and provide tangible news with which to attract investors.