Member Info for Fukurokuju79

Anyway NiVig it matters not. I think everyone would love an update ATM.

Anyway switching off markets are awful today.

Atb everyone

NiVig correcte if I'm wrong but the sept RNs wasnt reporting visual mineralisation if I recall. That wasn't until later and wasn't reported or images released until total depth. They hi at 951m ( so well after sept RNs) and reported on completion at EOH

Apparently so careful yes

NiVig

You said

.... When sulphides occurred first they “released info before the night shifts begun”. This is a more important hole. Along with a statement from Ben in an interview: “We will update the market as soon as we have results”. They previously had no problem on sharing pictures of core while drilling....

This has been said before and I don't think that's accurate. The Twitter release of cores from KAV were dated 16th November, the same date the RNS confirming intercept off mineralisation was released.
Furthermore the RNS stated...

Kavango Resources plc (LSE:KAV), the exploration company targeting the discovery of world-class mineral deposits in Botswana, is pleased to announce completion of Hole KSZDD001 in the Company's Kalahari Suture Zone ("KSZ") Project. Copper sulphide mineralisation and locally abundant fine grained, interstitial magnetite were encountered from first contact with the Proterozoic gabbro, at 951m to the end of hole at 1,000m ("EOH").

So firstly no images were released prior to regulatory announcement. Secondly, the RNS content mean they didn't release the news of mineralisation until the end of hole.

Just wanted to ensure this is clear as it's been mentioned a few times and the fact they haven't released anything can simply be because they are not at EOH depth.
I've no idea what or if they've found anything. As I've said I'm here for more than one drill and will hold anyway.
I'm as keen as anyone to know but I believe Ben will inform when he can good or bad in this one hole

Atb

Cox what has Ben said when you've raised your concerns with him?

Happy worth looking at some recent threads where r analysis and assumptions were made to feed into a potential price.
Then you can adjust your own assumptions/ cu prices etc into it

CuNextYear

Also regarding your first post copied below:

From the 16th of December RNS "Regarding the Cheyeza East oxide target, extensive test work has been underway, and the Company is assessing proprietary technology that has reportedly achieved high recovery levels and is being further assessed for its commercial viability."

Does this statement mean the Cheyeza East target is not currently commercially viable and the future commercial viability depends on wether this proprietary technology works?

I believe you specifically mean this part of the extract.... 'and the Company is assessing proprietary technology that has reportedly achieved high recovery levels and is being further assessed for its commercial viability'

So in answer to your above question...no I don't believe the RNS statement is questioning the commercial viability of the CE oxide target being dependent on the proprietary technology(although clearly that's all part of the in flight scoping study). Rather they are saying they are assessing if the proprietary technology itself is commercially viable. So to put it another way they are assessing if the increase in recovery grades of using proprietary tech is worth the cost over the more standard non proprietary technology.

We will have to wait for the scoping study really for black and white but from previously disclosed info (you'd have to revisit interviews) the plant would generate decent FCF for ARC.

We'll see.
Atb

CuNextYear - speaking for myself here I did reply to your original comments with balance IMO.
Freedom of speech applies to everyone, so it seems a little hypocritical of you to call that out while being judgemental of the content / contribution of others. Does it not?

Also while freedom of speech allows you to say what you like and broadly how you like (within reason of course) that isn't what gets decent engagement. It comes down to a little bit of consideration of tone when communicating.

Personally if you feel you need to understand the financials more on cash flows; and see the scoping study on commercial viability of the smaller scale production to generate FCF, that's fine. Each to their own and it's perfectly reasonable.

However until the detail is released I'm not sure how you can expect anyone to be able to point out anything you don't already know from the publicly available information from which you've already determined your position (or so it would seem).

Other than that I said everything else in first reply.

Good evening to you.

Seiz I totally agree in the tailings being a growth industry.
JLP is a little lofty for me personally. Not saying it's necessarily overvalued but it just doesn't fit my personal investment model.
Hope you do well there though

Seiz, interesting question.

I think copper is nearing peak production.

A few important factors in my personal investment case into copper stocks.

1. Majors haven't increased resource upgrades over recent times through spend on exploration, but rather by lowering cut off grades.
2. The journey from exploration to production is a decade plus generally and can be / is much more.
3. The macro case for copper demand is self evident and can't be fulfilled by current copper production.

These factors suggest to me very few options...

a) Producers esp majors need to invest more in exploration to increase reserves (won't happen quick enough)

b) Producers continue to reduce production cut off grades - this has been the go to approach for some time. In fact, underinvestment in exploration means that lowering of cut off grades is (to a large extent) what's increased the majors reserves for some time. It's unsustainable and impractical as an approach. They can't economically continue to reduce the cut off grades from existing mines, especially with the step change in demand.
Clearly the commodity price itself will need to and has risen to enable this and that only strengthens value of juniors with quality assets in the space.

c) M&A / JV - Majors / mid tiers will seek to acquire or JV in quality assets that are further along the exploration curve, or smaller already producing companies with exploration upside.

d) Reprocessing / Recycling - Very likely to grow IMO as an approach. However will only work as a tactical short term solution and not a strategic long term approach to meet demand.

So while tailings reprocessing is an option. I believe the only real strategic option for majors/mids is to spend on exploration and a significant part of this will be acquisitions. Also that the value of those acquisitions will only be enhanced by the macro position of copper and it's likely continued price rise.

This is my rationale and why I've positioned into predominantly copper based junior exploration / production companies that are undervalued and or have quality prospective assets.

Atb

Hi Ella,

I'm not here to pursuade you of anything or force my opinions so if you have a different one that is your prerogative. Your being convinced isn't an outcome I'm seeking.

NvS will have a more informed view of this now to judge the timescales. I'm not going to suggest it may not go beyond H1 this year, of course that's possible. That really wasn't my point. I was simply offering up a view that happens to be different to your view / outlook and I was referring to/highlighting the most recent expectation set by NvS.

I was also clarifying that the issue could equally be resolved very quickly through arbitration out of court.

I contribute to this board to engage, so both to offer and to listen to opinion. I share my beliefs and opinions based on my own research and knowledge.
I'm not a salesman for ARCM. This stuff isn't personal to me. I'm very comfortable with my investment case in ARCM as it stands and open enough to continually assess it.

My key point was..
'Legal cases. Interested majors (plural) with NDAs. If you've read the history of the assets it explains why there is all the jostling. It isn't because ARCM have nothing.'

In effect I'm less concerned with the peaks and troughs in share price, or gaining consensus from everyone on a board over a few months here or there. My personal approach (on this specific investment) isn't to swing trade the volatility.

My investment case is awaiting value realisation through a deal of the assets and / or to hit my price target. So in this instance I have to accept the volatility as IMO I'd rather be invested now than be locked out with a suspension.

I've a decent average here, which helps. I will hold this until my investment case isn't supported anymore, or it is successfully delivered.

Enjoy your weekend.
Atb

Yes KAV are main market but valid point legal.
Honestly the problem is generally the'rules' and/or 'guidance,' is generally grey and open to interpretation.
So I think it's fair to say they leave an element (I say that generously) of wiggle room.

Broadly I think Ben has shown he is fairly black and white and the only thing that will stop him updating the market IMO is not having the full info to provide an update.
My definition of full info being something is incomplete. In this context either the drilling or subsequent analysis to act as validation..

I'm reading nothing into any of it other than difficult conditions. Slow andvsteady. Albeit I can understand why many are feeling frustrated.

Atb have a good weekend all

What Keith said. 100% agree.(apart from the valentine's bit)

Now go get that lead rein and alcohol free beer!

Atb

Not aiming to generate a Ben stampede (unlike Keith and the elephant) but has anyone with these concerned engaged with Ben?

As has been said here if he can inform via interview of drill depth and daily progress he can't exactly say it's insider or material news.
While I'm perfectly happy to read all the comments here (as it is a discussion as someone said earlier) personally if I ever have serious concerns about comms etc I've always found it more beneficial to raise them with the company / accountable individuals.

It's important they hear views of investors in a constructive way of course. Even if it's to express a request that they now keep investors informed when they set an expectation via informing investors of rate and current depth of drill and targets.

Anyway justy view. Nothing more.

Atb

On the basis of karma - looking after mother nature and mother nature will look after us vibe we'll await the tweet of you leading an elephant with a beer (unopened) in hand...

It's okay Keith. For the benefit of the tweet you only need to ' ride an Elephant out of the Kalahari Suture Zone beer in hand. '
So no need to actually drink the beer.
That said, you can ride an elephant.... right?!

Lol

Boaty....totally agree with your comment 'I don't think Ben is intentionally testing Investor patience. I would imagine it is killing him not being able to tweet much or even conduct interviews. The good thing about our CEO is he does keep us Investors informed and seems to enjoy doing it. '

Ben is diligent and has strong stakeholder and communication management skills.
No news IMO means we don't have a definitive outcome to report yet so IMO KAV have not yet either

a) Stopped the drill I e. Have not encountered a problem severe enough that has forced them to stop the drill entirely
And/Or
b) have not yet successfully completed the hole to TD and any completed any subsequent DHEM.

On the above basis I'm of the strong belief that the only thing no news means is that we are still drilling. Given the duration this further implies (to me) mindea/KAV have had to slow the drill rate to take a cautious approach (we knew drill conditions were challenging and they want to succeed and retrieve cores).

The permutations of what the current situation is beyond those above are broad and can't be known until we are informed.
I'm very much still in the open minded camp in regards to what they have or have not found in the cores from this drill.
We may find out we may need to wait for assays etc if not visible.

I suspect that is why Keith is quiet too as nothing we can do but speculate and it best avoided tbh.

Personally (as already said) I'm here for more than this current drill.

Atb everyone
F79

Jeremiah -

When you say 'Probably speaking too soon as we have yet to find the grades and quantities that the majors are interested in'

As they've competed technical and broader DD before entering into commercial discussions and making an offer AA are defo already more than interested.

I'm sure you already these assets were originally part of AA's 30 Kabompo project targets.

In fact our licences encompass 9 of the 30 targets and of those 9 I believe we have the seven top targets (or something like that). The fact that the Sentinel mine was originally ranked number 22 puts the quality and prospectiveness of our assets into perspective.

I know what you mean though not so much they aren't interested without the grades but not enough to dip deep enough to meet ARCMs price tag. Ideally the drill season would have helped that but I suspect this exactly what MM etc were counting on.
MM expected NvS to want to settle fast to avoid delays. NvS stuck his guns though.
Shows a good trait for someone negotiating on our side but situation is annoying.

Like I say though it's the assets I'm here for, they are IMO world class and many know it. That coupled with NvS mindset is why I'm here and why I can hold through the peaks and troughs.

Worth lots more than this price.

Atb

Shorn. DD was already concluded and AA Zambia had confirmed it was satisfied to give notice to commence formal transactions however I totally
agree with you in terms of how it's likely to have stacked up.. at least something along those lines.

What we know is....
13/1/21 - ARCM RNS to confirm AA Zambia satisfied and entering into commercial discussions.
05/03/21 - ARCM appoint Rothschild as financial advisor.
10/03/21 - RNS on claims by MM etc re bogus debt claim are announced and start
09/07/21 - EA with AA has ended discussion have been positive and continue and been approached by a number of interested parties. NvS says 'As we have always said, any transaction has to sufficiently compensate Arc shareholders for allowing a major to take over an asset which we believe has significant potential to become a major tier-one copper discovery. ' discussions commence with other interested parties.

So this timeline to me does support our view.
I'd say something along the lines of commercial discussions started Jan 2021, progressed well and therefore ARC appointed Rothschild fairly quickly in very early March. Just 5 days after the media article and legal situation started.
4 months then pass without info during which we've continued to discuss with AA and they clearly offered ARCM a sum to takeover 'an asset' ((implies singular).
NvS didn't accept the deal as he said 'any transaction has to sufficiently compensate Arc shareholders for allowing a major to take over an asset'.
So AA either didn't offer enough and/or attempted to leverage the legal situation to their advantage.
Given the elapsed time since and the fact AA are still in the room suggests to me that AA used the case(s) to justify a lower offer, as if it was all they were willing to pay they would have moved on long ago.
Therefore every reason to suggest when these matters are cleared up AA are not against re assessing the offer, potentially with competition.

Atb