Member Info for howezap

Often I see repeated comments that Colin has said this and Colin has said that about “not the death of a thousand lashes” or about missing his targets, or he said they were only going to drill a few holes into Ascot. yes, I have used many of his quotes and have been readily willing to believe them but my understanding now has allowed me to dismiss them as just attempts to rally the market.

I find it quite amusing that folk so readily and willingly, want to believe those particular comments but then choose to totally dismiss the repeated comments from Colin and also from the highly respected management team about the genuine overall resource potential and that Racecourse will be up around the 2mt mark, and with Ascot, the 2mt will be “by far the bottom end”.

Ok to be fair, I think the swing to the south was ‘maybe’ closed off earlier than they had hoped, with talk that with the potential of extending would see clear 2mt, but they appear confident more recently they are close anyway.

The mid December Ascot discovery webinar, also showed the clear potential of the new discovery, with Jeremy Reid saying we need to drill a load more holes into it to understand it, incidentally this was before Colin even mentioned the initial targets to talk to AA by April/may, with maybe getting away with just 3 holes into Ascot to say ,”there you go gents there’s your other porphyry”
The Ascot discovery webinar was clearly a stronger lead in understanding what they were already planning to do at Ascot and the fact they went to the trouble of producing the webinar, to then only suggest sticking a few holes in it doesn’t make any sense. So Colin was just doing Colin in his own unique way in telling the market what it probably wanted to hear to stir up some excitement.

It was also made very clear in the ascot webinar back then, that they were unable, through regulatory and other reasons, why they cannot provide the market with a running total, and only when the updated resource model for Racecourse is released will that total be reported, as opposed to the opinions here of holding back bad results because that’s what he tends to do!

My theory from all this, and so much more that is there if one takes the time to look or listen, all points to and supports the belief that the extended drilling in phase 2 was to realise the potential of another ‘Cadia like’ system as opposed to just chasing more copper because of a shortfall in their expectations and why they have shut up shop in reporting to hold off ‘perceived’ bad news.

There is a big difference.

Hi Johnswan I do understand where you are coming from and the bottom line is , as long as the resource is fit for purpose to trigger one or both of the buy back mechanisms that is why we are mostly all here and ultimately all that matters.

However, consider this, there are lots of factors to consider when valuing a copper deposit, the upshot is that a world-class copper deposit holds a copper resource whose value far exceeds the cost of mining and processing it. This continued fixation that grades have not been up to expectations is complete rubbish. They have been consistent in the lower grades with large runs of it, that have nearly all been of economic grade or above. Exactly what majors want, consistency over 20+ years. Racecourse is looking to be in excess of a 400mt ore body, of which is mostly shallow to surface. That fact, that it is open pittable is the most significant factor in this, it’s by far the cheapest method of mining. Also, with it being in such a favourable location both politically, geographically and probably even more important, environmentally. You have only got to look at Pebble in the pristine Alaskan tundra, couldn’t be in a more environmentally sensitive region which is why it will never be a mine! Bushranger is at the complete opposite end of the spectrum where there is a social acceptance and genuine political support for these types of mine in a mining nation with other open pit mines on its doorstep. Which makes the project highly likely it will be sold and go on to be mined.

A high grade at a low depth can have far less value than a mediocre grade consistent through a shallower resource.

It’s that simple in general, and with a big step up in resource tonnage the copper tonnage will follow, and with it a financial evaluation that will no doubt show a huge improvement in profitability from the already NPV positive study on the far smaller original 71mt resource.

The average grade of porphyry copper ores is below 0.4%Cu, with the proportion of ore minerals being less than 2 percent of the total volume of the ore rock.

Why have the drill results failed to support his optimism. You are clueless JS try doing some research

Another simplified example regarding the average copper grade throughout a resource.
Where a resource of, for example 500mt, and 0.4% of that 500mt is estimated to be the amount of copper contained.
By lowering the economic cut off from 0.3 down to 0.15 at which substantially more of the lower grades are evident in comparison to higher grades, the average grade percent of copper within the whole ore body does not reduce proportionately.
So being at an average of 0.4 doesn’t reduce down to an average 0.3 because a load of assays have come in at 0.2. It’s all about the extra quantity of recoverable copper that keeps up the average grade which is the percentage of copper within the whole ore body.

My god it’s hard to explain but once you get your head around it ….bingo!

The average is a constant across the whole deposit, soon to be an upgraded resource for rc

The cut off is determined by processing costs and commodity prices. Hence a range is given in financial modelling that reflects these changes.

All ore within the pit will be processed, where an economic cut off is determined the plant is modified to accept above these minimum grades, ( to put it simply) what’s left below the cut off grade are in the tailings.
Just by increasing the cut off value by half eg. from 0.3 down to 0.15 it does not necessarily mean that just a double increase in the amount of recoverable copper as there will generally be considerably more copper at lower grades within the ore body, so potentially the recoverable copper at these lower grades could increase by much more than two or three times the tonnage as opposed to a higher cut off.
I think this is where some confusion lies from the perception that 2mt is not achievable from the results from phase 1 and 2

Cygnus,
You could well be right, although my rationale is that the met test work is to go toward financial evaluation for a new conceptual pit study for Racecourse. Not the old pit study based on the currently inferred 71mt
It would not be representative for the deposit if samples were only taken from the currently inferred part of the resource I would have seriously thought.
Also they use the term deposit, which would mean the whole of racecourse. If they were just referring to the 71mt part only they would have used the term resource, as a deposit as I’m sure you already know is that a resource exists within a both discovered and undiscovered deposit.
Sorry not meant to sound anal lol

Hi Cygnus thank you for the numbers, it’s certainly reassuring as there is plenty of wiggle room to be further conservative in the ranges.

Jeremy Reid stated in ascot webinar at the very end that the deposit would need to show about 400-450mt to yield 2mt cu at 0.44%cu average. There is certainly no reason to doubt his perception.

As for this latest estimate for anticipated grades it is clearly for the deposit and not for just the higher grade part.

>>Four master composite samples of quartered drill core were prepared, based upon a geographic location within the Racecourse and Ascot deposits, namely Racecourse Central, Racecourse North-West, Racecourse South-East and Ascot
· The samples were representative of the anticipated average copper grade of the deposit, ranging from 0.33-0.48% Cu, with………….<<<

We have just been offered the single most important piece of the jigsaw for the Racecourse model, the average grade anticipated to be between .33 and .48%cu

>>> The samples were representative of the anticipated average copper grade of the deposit, ranging from 0.33-0.48% Cu, with minor silver (1.1g/t to 3.3g/t) and trace gold (0.007g/t to 0.04g/t), other than the more gold-rich Ascot sample which assayed 0.30g/t Au <<<

We have a good idea of strike length, width and deposit depth ( not the anticipated pit depth )
The economic cut off we could assume 0.15cu and so working on those grades ranges where is the rock tonnage and disposition now.

Could I now hand over to one of our resident number crunchers if any are willing to offer up.
It will surely lead to a more realistic ‘guess’ if only to see it realistically being more then 1.5mt than less than that.

As Stevemocal suggests, If it is in line with Colin’s estimate for racecourse then that leaves a big chunk of extra value to be added from Ascot and current multi porphyry potential.

I would be inclined to go with your option C Steve

Not expecting the updated resource model for Racecourse until after the Ascot initial model is complete, these are excerpts from recent news release that point to them both being released together. However, from the first one listed below, there is a outside possibility we could see an updated conceptual pit before but I believe unlikely as they may not wish to divulge the tonnages involved until the resource model is released later.

27th july RNS
All results have now been returned from Racecourse which will allow the team to commence the modelling of the Racecourse conceptual open pit and define the contained copper tonnages.

4th Aug
I look forward to a ‘complete’ formal summarisation of all the information generated by Phase Two and informing the market of our on-going strategy." 

30th June year report
The phase 2 exploration programme is about to be completed and when we have modelled and evaluated ‘all’ the raw information, we will be well advanced on the value curve and able to position the project in the global market.

Also from year report
Upon the return of all remaining assay results from the Phase Two Drilling Programme at Racecourse and Ascot, a new resource model for both prospects will be developed.

I’m really not sure where you are coming from porv, there have been a very decent range assayed at +/- 0 .3cu. The modelling will take into account these mineralised trends through out the deposit and not just the spot results. You or I have no idea what that modelling shows
Have some faith it’s got to be worth a punt ;-)

http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/9509T_5-2022-7-27.pdf

Curiosity had the better of me to see what recovery rates Newcrest were achieving at Cadia. They have recently undergone a big expansion project due to complete late this year costing $175m for the build phase that will increase plant capacity and increase recovery rates for gold and copper by 3.5% and 2.7% respectively, with Projected recovery rate over LOM for copper will increase to 85.2% and gold to 80.3%

So initial met test results of 89-90% for Racecourse are very encouraging and potentially we are seeing the difference in geology between the two types of deposit as RC is more copper dominant and if I recall rightly from an interview many months ago, Colin predicted that there would be less issues at separation because of the reduced gold.

Will be interesting to see how much the copper recovery rate for ascot reduces in comparison as has stronger amounts of silver and gold.

Hi James
The cut off value s a changing variable that is influenced by commodity prices and mining processing costs that will be different for each block of ore that makes up the resource. Obviously an average across the resource will be determined, generally processing costs are more rigid but prices for for concentrate will change so they will show a range of cut off’s that would reflect different copper prices that ultimately drive the change. These met results will have a positive impact on the cut off for sure.

Pleasing met results release. Maybe this is the start of a news drive to coincide with completion of the modelling.
This will appease many of the concerned and give some much needed confidence all round.

>> The samples were representative of the anticipated average copper grade of the deposit, ranging from 0.33-0.48% Cu, with minor silver (1.1g/t to 3.3g/t) and trace gold (0.007g

AA have a one time opportunity to buy back into the project before it falls away, unless any part of the project is in Xtracts half excluding the half way line. And any part of that resource…..no hang on that’s not right is it ?

On the contrary Butlerman, let’s not get caught up in being happy with sub 2mt. The resource target for the buy back is a really important threshold for the company. With Jeremy Reid also implying the significance of getting to 2mt as soon as possible. It is the primary option to trigger the first right of refusal of a buy back in what a binding agreement. The only way the company can be free of it is if AA pass up on their option once 2mtCuEq minimum is put to them and or the decision to mine. Or have the decency to let Xtract be freed from it.

Having the decision to mine alongside the 2mt will, as CB has implied will, “put them up n a stronger position around the negotiating table.”

Xtract are going up against a major mining company that are not going to be a push over. That is the bottom line, but my point was originally to sway the opinion of the doubters that believe that CB has been ‘too overly optimistic ’ or is simply holding back information because that is what he ‘usually’ does. Too add some weight to his claims by referring to the project directors similar claims too. Surely his claim holds more clout!

Over the past year we have all seen the futile attempts of knowledgeable members to guesstimate tonnages from RC with only crude methods of guessing the parameters. Without having the modelling software available that takes into account all the subtleties and idiosyncrasies of mineralisation trends throughout the deposit from the raw data it is almost impossible to have any degree of accuracy.

Even though time has passed CB has still not deviated from his original estimates for RC.
The 2mt only becomes irrelevant and not worth focussing on when the resource exceeds that threshold.

The grades at racecourse we are seeing are typical of low grade porphyry ore of around the 0.2 - 0.3 with a higher grade crown that has already been drilled and modelled from the original 71mt inferred resource that gives a 0.44 Cu average at 0.3 cut off. It is these high grade zones, that make any porphyry deposits economical. The extent of racecourse mineralisation beyond the main inferred resource was not likely continue to be in the 0.44 range toward the outer margins and as such would be in line with expected results. As with the majority of the Boda system, it has typical grades between 0.2-0.3 with high grade deeper breccia zone that will make Boda economical. Similar bulk low grades in the range are seen at the Cadias too.

So grades certainly appear to be quite normal across the deposit. With an estimate from project director Jeremy Reid that a resource increase from 71mt to around 400-450mt will be there abouts to hit the 2mtCuEq target at a 0.44 average. This is with that economic cut off at 0.3Cu
The resource average grade will come down from 0.44 Cu but as has been stated the cut off will reduce from 0.3 down to 0.15 (expected) so it’s looking promising and in line with Colin’s repeated claims of 2mt or closer to it, from roughly 400mt+ of rock from calcs for Racecourse alone. The further infill drilling to improve the high grade lol recoveries in the early mine phase will also have a positive effect on those average grades if evaluation of the model warrants it.

Incidentally, if more credibility can be added to Colins comments on the project in the body of recent RNS’s, would that not then, give a degree of credibility toward not only Colin’s repeated claims of 2mt but also Jeremy Reid’s comments in interview? In fact I would say Jeremy’s comment gives credibility to Colin’s!
As iceberg put it, believing all what a CEO says is like believing all a car dealer says. I would not think that Jeremy Reid would want to sully his own professional integrity by making unrealistic claims.

You can see clearly from the Legacy Minerals presentation and their quarterly report what a long ambitious task they have ahead of them, early days in their discovery of rockley, with some other projects similar in position not having been drilled yet with varying EM surveying and sampling done. They are into a $4.5m drill campaign JV with a drilling company to give shareholders more “discovery exposure” in addition to currently planned campaigns in two of their other projects. Although not at Rockley.

Would not like to guess how much of the current 12m MC of the company they will eventually have to give away to pull off any ‘meaningfull’ success in exploration and over time.

Giving away part of your company or funding through placements is what it is with exploration for small caps, and with no guarantees at any point of a successful outcome.

Xtract are in a different league with the ability now to self fund its exploration from income which puts them In an enviable position from other juniors.

Always worth the reminder what a healthy position they are actually in anyway, let alone the timing of being in the right space at the right time and with rising copper and gold prices particularly.

General summary for Ascot but concludes with both
31st may
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/XTR/ascot-prospect-drill-results-summary-0p0379d63vj8pug.html

Conclusion

>>The Phase 2 Drilling Programme at the Racecourse and Ascot prospects has intersected copper-gold mineralisation over 3km of strike length which forms a copper-gold mineralised trend that compares favourably to the mineralised porphyries at Newcrest's world-class Cadia mine and the Alkane's Boda-Kaiser trend which also occur over 3km of strike (refer to ASX announcement by Alkane Resources Limited 11 May 2022).
Ascot and Racecourse have similar widths of copper-gold mineralisation, with Ascot containing thicker and higher-grade gold intersections in comparison to Racecourse. Xtract is undertaking further assessment to understand the economic potential of these thicker, higher grade gold intersections, particularly at shallower depths. The Ascot mineralisation has currently been drilled over 750m of strike length and is open to the south and at depth. Geological data suggests that an equivalent to the best mineralised "crown" position above the porphyry at the Racecourse prospect, has not yet been intersected at Ascot. This provides further upside to what already one of the most significant greenfields porphyry copper-gold discovery in the Lachlan Fold Belt since the discovery of Boda in 2019. Xtract's assessment of the Ascot prospect is ongoing.

That is it I guess, after all is just a summary and followed up with the interviews.

Interim followed up also with kev and Phil on 8th June for the record

https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNjQ0MzcucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wNi0wNzovcG9zdHMvODA5Njk4NA%3D%3D

Hi Andrew I believe it followed straight after on the 31st may although titled ‘Ascot prospect drill result summary’ it concludes at the bottom with an overall summary that includes Racecourse.

Followed same day with a podcast with Zak

https://podcasts.google.com?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNTExMzMucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wNS0zMTovcG9zdHMvODA5MjcxNg%3D%3D