Member Info for howezap

Butlerman, I think your nerves will be just fine, it’s not a cup competition, Colin did say it was in the premier league :-)

Really good point you make Steve about prompting AA to engage. I’ve plucked some other comments from the same end of phase 2 RNS.

-A Phase Three drilling programme is under consideration, with aims to;……

-The process has been exhaustive, producing a very firm platform for project evaluation and on-going decision making.

-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." 

Will admit it certainly doesn’t read as being decisive that a 3rd phase will be actually be undertaken, is more than likely probable. With that, you do make a fair point with the potential reasons to do so that you have previously given.

I still think overall I prefer that the further, exploration/ infill and definition phase was decided purely, as being the result of superior geophys and resource potential to have a significant effect on the financial model though. Maybe that’s my naivety and lack of business experience.
( I build stuff! )

Colin is like the equivalent of proper football before VAR when you could debate a contentious decision in the pub after the game. These days it’s, “ it was definitely a penalty!!”
“Oh Yeah….it was.” Great!

‘I believe’ the geophysics was too strong to ignore

In defence of Colin he has he has only ever said the target is to talk to AA. Previously was made clear that reaching the 2mt was very important to the company and to see what AA wanted to do.

That, is a big resource in itself, a huge milestone some 5 or 6 times increase of the main inferred resource. Now with very strong evidence that the area is multi mineralised with multiple porphyry, some below and some outlying, the intention is to prove they are there and mineralised. The company shouldn’t be expected to stick to a verbal target with ever changing resource potential and geological understanding since target for talks were set at the turn of the year.

I am not in any doubt talks would have been put back anyway without the geo political and economic downturn, as has been stated in reportRNS
>> In general, our exploration activities in Australia have been extremely encouraging and without a doubt we have discovered a major system, well beyond our original expectations.<<

I do think many will be appreciative in the end,I include myself, when a deal is done. Of the hand holding and ‘perceived’ underarm tactics along the way to keep us all interested and importantly, invested. But quite frankly I don’t believe he has done so, the geophysics was too strong to ignore, and once the high grade precious metals were found it changed the project potential considerably from there.

Missed all the fun today am very late arrival to the party.

Some points of own if not already been mentioned, they didn’t choose the money shot, to drill deep down the throat of the gold intercept, which we believed they may do, going by the last mention in the audited report.

>> We have drilled a further 8 holes into the area, with varying results and our last hole assays, at the time of writing this report, (38-39) had minimal copper intersections, but had very significant gold intersections, with higher than previously experienced molybdenum values. The lithology leads us to the opinion that the true porphyry may be deeper, and we will therefore drill a further hole to test this prognosis.<<

Choosing instead, the last drill to target extension at depth of mineralisation around the discovery hole 35 to add to resource model it would seem.

It is clear though they are going to test the higher grade gold at both Rc and Ascot. And looking to delineate the extents of Ascot now too. I’m happy with that, it was always a bit wishy washy to suggest just sticking 5or 6 holes into Ascot. Particularly if the extent of mineralisation increases further south than what’s been drilled with 49 at the southern extent of the currently defined extent of ascot, showing locally strong porphyry related mineralisation which is indicative of that theory.

No mention of conceptual pit model, does that mean the 2mt is expected to be the minimum reached when both the updated resource from RC and the maiden resource from Ascot are tallied? Without the necessity to go down the decision to mine route?

Again, from audited report,
>>We intend to rework the conceptual model, with the benefit of more definitive grades, metallurgical test work results and tonnage disposition.<<

In that case, is it likely it will not be reworked until after phase 3 when further drilling to the high grade crown can be assimilated.

Fair do’s NrM my guess at phase 3 being 10-15 holes estimate would be simply ****ing in the wind with likely drilling needed to achieve now planned.

Sit on hands and accumulate.

There maybe some reasoning to doubt if AA will be willing to make a bid to move into the region. On many occasions it has been suggested that Newcrest may be in a stronger position with operations and the technical and engineering support etc, already in NSW with the Cadia’s.

Other than that I see another investor who has no one else to blame but themselves for their own poor decisions.

If AA could at ‘anytime’ decide they wanted to exercise their option. It is pointless to include the one time only, ‘before 2mt is reached’ option

They had the chance but unlikely due to the complete lack of resource building news. If and when RC is over the threshold then they have missed that opportunity so now it will be at xtract discretion to build the resource as big as possible before approaching Anglo.
(Another CB quote) when asked at last AGM (I think) why not declare 1.9mt?

I tend to be in agreement with stevem, I think the part that confuses is the one time only chance ‘before’ 2mt is reached.
That may be the part where Colin had mentioned and on video?? It just seems a very unlikely scenario though, as ‘before 2mt’ was reached there would not be a JORC compliant resource if xtract are still exploring.
I much preferred the guess the drill location game tbh

Was reported on 17th May EE
Drill hole BRDD-21-038 was drilled 200m to the south from the Ascot discovery hole at an inclination of -50 degrees towards the west and completed at a final depth of 659.6m. The drill hole intersected a wide 104m interval of 0.24% CuEq from a relatively shallow downhole depth of 79m, which included two higher grade intervals of 10m at 0.35% CuEq from 101m downhole and 8m at 1.46% CuEq from 175m downhole. At greater depths in the hole a number of vertical mineralised vein structures were recorded with high copper equivalent and gold values. This hole offers the potential for significant intervals of along-strike copper mineralisation to extend close to surface at Ascot, upgrading the open pit potential of the prospect.

Decent copper equivalent @ 1.46 the highest seen

https://www.miningstockeducation.com/2022/07/erdene-continues-to-outline-ulaan-feeder-zone-intersects-27-metres-of-3-5-g-t-gold-including-2-metres-of-24-9-g-t-gold/

Some really impressive intercects from Erdene at their feeder zone at Ulaan discovery in Mongolia. It’s no wonder Colin could hardly contain his excitement with the gold potential at ascot.

As we know, Ascot also contains silver and moly, which were all shown to be strong in content and suggested being close to the feeder due to the higher grades. Some of the focus will be on this mineral feeder system at ascot when operations resume with further metallurgy test work already planned since Jan. Can only wait to see how comprehensive drill planning will be in what appears to be an area of notable importance. Hopefully they will go over the next steps at Ascot soon.

Don’t know if or how the geology differs from Ulaan, but If they can find anywhere near that kind of increase in grades then boom!

Agree flipper I actually had the sense the company were holding back with all the shouting from the rooftops when FB finally started up. Its like they didn’t want to steal any of Empress’s thunder! Maybe they felt it would have been rather rude, but I suppose after all, they did the hard bit and put up all the plant money.

Don’t get too excited it’s just a deal with a distributor to export the new line of Bushranger merchandise. It’s the new marketing strategy they are trying, T-shirts, frilly knickers/panties/ thongs /Mini/Micro skirts etc big silly hats and fridge magnets with the choice of RC or Ascot on the front of shirts and the slogan “Porphyry’s Rock” on the back.

Consider there are still four unidentified holes from Ascot and south of racecourse that they’re waiting on. Any of these could’ve been to find the feeder and we know one of them in particular was drilled into the deep gold. On the other hand the other holes may have tested further anomalies shown from the new, ‘still’ unreported geophys, they have been picking them off! So the geological picture could well be bigger than what has already been reported.

Certainly hope they do a webinar as before for the conceptual pit with the new IP geophys. That’s not too much of an ask.

That’s the point of the next phase isn’t it, to prove that the system is mineralised, so we don’t give away a Cadia. Not to prove up mineralisation. That’s the big difference that xtract have in that, even though they have needed to consider and model with a view to the potential and the eventual extraction for Racecourse, I m sure phase 3 will be more focussed on maximising resource potential from a marketing perspective than they would be toward the actual extraction and selling process.

I would say the next phase is not going to be anywhere as extensive as phase 2. Maybe a wild guess of 10-15 holes notwithstanding the shallow surface programmes for RC and Ascot

I think over the 18+ months it’s apparent that nobody has a full grasp of the agreement.

There was always a suggestion AA could step in early with an offer ‘before’ 2mt was declared that maybe would not reflect full project potential as further exploration would stop, for what we would have up to that point would still have received a fair value it, but we would miss out on the bonanza as any offer would have to be taken seriously and prob go to shareholder vote. It does form one part of the overall buy back agreement.
Now wether or not that was even a thing.. who knows?

Any major will want it de-risking first, they buy success. It will not be until xtract are ready to sell to AA that the buy back mechanism will trigger.
That’s my best shot at it,

>>The “Buy Back” option held by Anglo represents an excellent mechanism for capturing value upon ‘exploration success’ and returning that value to shareholders

The Rc pit model will be released with tonnages when it’s done. There is an argument to say wether they will wait until market picks up but I don’t see that as the case. It will not affect the ongoing drill programme planning for Ascot either way.

Is likely will just see the new conceptual pit with the financial evaluation, it will not trigger an automatic buy back wether 2mt or not, so they do not need to wait for all exploration to be finalised to release it.

I understand it to be that all the licence is included in a sale too joeman
(Also confirmed by CB in another interview)

Steve, the enormity now and financial implications of the project has clearly increased since the new round of geophys and subsequent gold intercepts. I don’t think it is any doubt it would have gone into next year anyway.

Is looking very much like Ascot and other anomalous targets will be the crux of a phase 3 when operations continue, after the break to evaluate the data from Ascot and to plan the new drill programme whilst working toward completing all the modelling for RC.

CB did say, “We’ll be ‘ending up’ with a near surface programme for both Rc and Ascot.” This may imply that these drills to bolster the higher grade early recoveries may even be in a final 4th phase!

It’s worth looking forward with an open mind and forgetting about any sale on the horizon for now. CB was clearly evasive when pressed by kev Hornsby on talking to AA at end of last midweek takeaway.

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

If the 2mtCuEq does show to come from RC model alone, the overall resource estimate could well be on the way up to a billion tonnes of ore after a 3rd phase. Even better, if both the gold systems can be modelled with decent strike and mass, we could potentially have a billion dollar asset.

Been trying to pick up any clues from previous podcast comments and in RNS that would give further indication at what level of further exploration we could potentially expect from a third phase of drilling to follow on at Ascot.

It has been pointed out that all results are in for RC and so the model can be finished. My interp is the financial model will ascertain wether the high grade parcel will be extended up to 8+ years with a follow on, shallow drilling programme. This will be targeted to the north west of RC above the deep intercepts of holes 18 and 20.
From 10 feb RNS
>>> Follow-up drilling in this area will focus on the interpreted shallower and higher-grade 'crown' to the mineralisation<<<

Other clues I can find are, one is a comment made while discussing the gold system at Ascot in that they want to find out what’s above and below it. We know they did a deep drill to test below for the last hole in the programme. As for above it.
Also from 31st may RNS to support that
>>> Our assessment of the drilling results from Ascot is ongoing and we will focus on the potential to extend the gold intersections to shallower depths."<<<
( This is not the high grade crown they will also be looking for, but will add toward the early recoverable high grade ore that could be derived partly from this shallow gold )

from 26thJan RNS
>>> Mineral textures observed within the Ascot drill core could indicate that Ascot sits closer to a feeder zone for the system and the company intends to model and test this theory with further test work and drilling.
(This may have been tested, there are some unidentified holes not yet reported )

From 10th may RNS
>>> Drill Hole BRDD-21-033 targeted an outlying geophysical anomaly to the east and intersected a high-grade gold interval of 15.5 g/t Au which warrants follow-up drilling to test for along-strike and down-dip extension

From 31st may RNS
>>> 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 will maybe need some initial exploratory boreholes to find it first )

The big question, if criteria are met to trigger the buy back, will AA be approached once the models for Racecourse are complete to persue a sale? Or will Xtract continue to use the safety net of having the binding agreement in place as a deterrent to fend of any corporate manoeuvrings while more asset value is added with each drill?

One thing is more clear to me now, my outlook has changed. There is without a doubt huge value to be added from Ascot and would be absolutely irresponsible, even negligent of the BOD not to proceed with further exploratory work if it can take the project continually further up the value curve, particularly with the implications the gold will have on the financial model. Especially now with meaningful income to fully fund any necessary work.

I’m sure you are probably right Butlerman I’m open minded, it again shows how wildly CB’s comments can be interpreted.

On listening back to 26 Jan podcast, Colin makes a very intriguing comment!

CB >>>Anglo have got first right of refusal, their approach to this project, their decision will largely develop when the project actually moves on to a much larger company who can handle the very large project that we’re in the business of adding value day by day. <<<

It could suggest that Anglo may take Bushranger back, but potentially they will farm it out to a bigger company than Xtract that will be in a better position to de risk it considerably more to get it to the next level before Anglo then decide to step in. If I am hearing it right that is !! In which case, it’s seems unlikely they will pass on their option to buy back as they simply could not ensure they will be the preferred buyer to take over the more advanced project at a later date from a third party.
Unless, there is a sell on clause attached to an new agreement where, if AA decide to, or agree to pass at this juncture, Xtract agree to incorporate a sell on clause in a new sale agreement the new owners would inherit, when they aquire BR from Xtract. It would see them having to then give AA first refusal once a new increased resource estimate target or other specific level of geological confidence is reached. In return, Xtract agree to receive a future sell on royalty payment or other incentive of the ‘next’ sell on back to AA or other.

What do others understand from Colin’s comments?

Actual comment @ 4min 50sec but listen carefully too, from 4min he speaks freely as though he already knows AA’s intent

https://podcasts.google.com?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNTExMzMucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wMS0yNjovcG9zdHMvODAxOTQyMQ%3D%3D