Member Info for Ella10

I don't know enough to be confident about the history of the project but the May 2019 agreement with MMP was for 10 years. The apparent Royalty agreement with MMP appears to be 2.25% up to 95000 oz gold and then 0.75% into perpetuity. Does this mean MMP will have liability for a royalty even after the 10 years is up or has the structure of the XTR/MMP contract changed?

The technical report on the sedar website is interesting as it contains collated info on Fair Bride.

Andrew ,

I can't figure out how to post a link bit go to sedar.com and search for Empress under companies and you will see a technical report for 12th March. This is a 90 page report on Fair Bride. I am still only trying to understand the other projects and haven't read this report (yet) so know much less than you on these projects....

I don't know a lot of the detail around XTRs 'other' projects and thought I should do a little more digging. The following may already be known. I found a royalty agreement with Empress Royalty
https://empressroyalty.com/streams-royalties/development-stage-royalties/manica/
And
https://investingnews.com/news/gold-investing/empress-files-technical-report-on-manica-gold-project/

From this I went to Sedar.com website where there is an in depth technical report on Fair Bride for Empress Royalty on the 12th March. This seems to have a lot of info in it which folk with more project knowledge than me may find interesting. It seems to have gathered a lot of historical and current info together in one report.

I think we will see some improvements in communication in the near future..... :-)

My worry was that CE and I had posted a similar respose at pretty much exactly the same time - not rhe fact that there were large trades without a TR1. Apologies for any confusion.

CE,
I hadn't seen your post - I'm getting worried....

I'm not sure what the TR1 rules for AIM are. Sandfire were issued with GLR shares in Feb and a TR1 RNS was issued a month later. A previous RNS did state that they would be getting these shares so I'm not sure if a TR1 was strictly required in this case.
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/GLR/holdings-in-company-dt0a8yustldh022.html

I assume the following sensitivies will have influenced the valuation.
"We are excited to expand our world-class portfolio to include the Tatogga project in the Tahltan Territory located in the highly sought-after Golden Triangle district of British Columbia, Canada," said Newmont president and CEO Tom Palmer, in a statement. "Newmont recognizes that our relationships with Indigenous, First Nations and host communities are critical to the way we operate. We are committed to continue building a constructive and respectful relationship with the Tahltan Nation, including with the community of Iskut, which is near the project, in anticipation of exploring this highly prospective area. We understand and acknowledge that Tahltan consent is necessary for advancing the Tatogga project and we will partner with the Tahltan Nation at all levels, and with the Government of British Columbia to ensure a shared path forward"

Hi Steve,
As per my post and Luckys comments we are sti in phase 1. The plans have obviously changed since the RNS you quoted but I'm not sure what phase 1 now consists of.

CB mentioned phase 2 drilling. The distinction beween the 2 phases has become blurred. Is it likely that a reasonable model will be produced from phase 1 drilling and then phase 2 will take it to JORC. I don't know how many more holes are now in phase 1. I assume there will be a bit of a break between the 2 phases to allow the geos to to assess the best plan of attack for phase 2, since the drilling so far has been pretty relentless. I wondered if the phase 1 and phase 2 distinction would allow the six week milestone mentioned previously to be met.
Another company is supposed to be commencing a drilling program around the end of March and I would expect it to utilise QH. I assume he is still working on Bushranger and I was trying to figure out how the 2 demands on his time might align.

Hi CE,

What has convinced you that there is more than 800m of mineralisation? I couldn't see anything to confirm what depth the mineralisation went to but may have missed it.

It may be Sandfire have 2 seperate purchase agreements for licences as the announcement mentions agreementS. It could be a second agreement with GLR, an agreement with another of CBs companies that have KCB licences (anyone any info on this) or an agreement with an unrelated company. I agree CE (not often I say that!) having one part of the agreement in US$ and another in Aus $ would be a bit odd. The RNS this morning confirms SFR are still holding GLR shares so that is reassuring ( which I assume was the purpose).

The SFR announcement refers to sale agreementS so maybe a second batch of licences have been sold. The second batch could use the completion date for the VWAP. The form looks like a standard form that uses AUD but the quantity doesn't appear to tie up with US $1.5m but maybe a second lot of shares for a second agreement makes up the difference.

Will be interesting to see what SFR are buying for 3m AUD . Also be interesting to see how their investor relations compare to GLR. Exciting times :-)

XTR???? :-)

I wonder how responsive SFR investor relations is....

Although, I'm sure we would have had an RNS of the deal had changed :-)..........

Hi CE
The number of shares does tie up with around 3m AUD but we were only to get US $1.5m in shares and the rest in cash...and the VWAP dates appear to be using latest pricing rather than those in our RNS.

Hi CE,

Thats a possibility. I wonder who the error lies with if that is it? I haven't checked that everything else aligns.

Hi CE,
I had read that but as far as I can tell the number of shares and VWAP dates appear to be different to our RNS. It may be for someone else but seems a bit coincidental.

An interesting Sandfire announcement.
https://www.sandfire.com.au/site/PDF/52cedaa3-4051-4381-ae74-fe71adc106dd/ProposedissueofSecuritiesSFR

I assume these are for GLR but the quantity of shares and VWAP appear different to those in our RNS. I wonder if the deal has changed.

If the above are for GLR for the deal already RNSd then the deal appears to have changed and valuation dates for SFR shares are different so counting on SFR shares increasing in value from the announced date may be a bit optimistic