Member Info for howezap

I recalled Caveatemptor posting this about a sale. Add on the extra couple of months or so to the programme, that would bring Colin’s target for a sale toJan-Feb 23

Caveatemptor >>>When we went to the investor event last October, CB said he had a target of completing the deal within 12 months - so i am happy to give him until the end of October this year to come up with the goods - but I will be disappointed if it takes any longer...<<<

Going by the exploration of racecourse from the mid eighties. It is apparent the plantation forrest that envelopes most of the main resource now, could well have, ‘not’ been fully planted back then allowing for any future potential mining activities.
Looking at satellite images of the Forrest imo, the trees do not look mature enough to be nearly 40 years old. You can still clearly see the rows in which they were planted where the crowns have not established enough to cover the forrest canopy. Shadowing from isolated existing older trees show they, in particular are a lot taller and mature than the plantation trees. Yes they could be a columnar species but are still imo not that mature in height.
Just an observation

Im more certain of the potential of a pre-existing 4-6 year recoverable high grade component at racecourse , through data from historical work. Also from infill drilling through potentially both drill phases of current campaign.

In both most recent podcasts I believe Colin maybe got it wrong or was certainly more confusing. in the first of the two podcasts as the recovery periods overlap.

In Zak’s podcast he said that the high grade component will have an infill programme to increase the higher recoveries to 5,6 or 7years done before the resource model is finished.
?With kev and Phil he mentions the high grade component at 4-6 years recovery, but then I got the impression that it will be extended further to 8 years, saying that might send us into an infill programme that will ‘extend’ recoveries from 4-6years to 8 years.

Here is a post from leprechaun1974 sharing his research on extent of the historical drilling done at racecourse.

Leprechaun1974
>>>RE: BRC014 2m @ 8.07g/t gold
29 May 2021 20:56
I've spent a lot of time on this website https://portal.geoscience.gov.au/ trying to find the locations of holes where we have previous assay results i.e. BRC014 that you are interested in. I have a spreadsheet of the location of drill holes from previous drilling (unfortunately only one from AA) but they are of little interest without the assay results.?As a thank you to the more knowledgable on here that have shared info I will also share what I have managed to collate.?https://leprechaun1974shares.blogspot.com/?It's rough and ready, only 2 posts, 1 with the map and 1 with the grades listed for the holes.<<<

There would have been sufficient time to complete a short shallow programme if was decided.

Many thanks sq52 I had 174 stuck there, so close!

Can any member recall the full member name of leprechaun or can forward the link showing the shallow, quite intensive historical drill mapping in a grid pattern from Racecourse. It may have even been from as far back as when Lachlan star had the license.
Trying to understand the pre existing high grade component on the main inferred resource (71mt)
Or steer me in the right direction.

My take-
It’s now been a whole month gone by since 31st may RNS reported the most recent hole completed, hole 52, amongst others had been sent for assays and were waiting for them to get back from the lab. Currently they are drilling at footrot finally. With a hole planned to test for deeper gold system back at Ascot, the drilling phase is about to be completed suggests after the Ascot deep drill, to then work the models and position the project in the global market. Which ti me doesn’t mean AA are out of the picture imo they just have first refusal.

In report they have ‘largely’ delineated Racecourse. This could mean a last hole to the very north west margin that was still undefined, also a couple of extra holes to sure up where there was a gap in the model. To me, the term largely delineated suggests a conclusion as are maybe happy with what they have there with the potential the couple of holes to sure up the model at least, have been completed already and in the last month.

It does appear from report that high grade component at Racecourse that will pay of the CapEx has either, already been, or will not be extended to beyond 4-6 years as was initially suggested they may do so in last podcast. Or at least there is no mention of that in the report. IMO from the podcast mention, I got the impression they would decide ‘after’ the financial evaluation to embark on the programme to extend to 6-8 years. But again they may have already completed the shallow infill programme if they decided to extend.

To sum up, there has potentially been up to six weeks plus of drilling available since 52 was last reported as waiting for assays, also allowing for when hole was completed, core sampling and logging, prep for assays and received by lab.

Plenty of opportunity to complete any of the outstanding drills mentioned before. No reason whatsoever to doubt the phase of drilling will end soon and project exploration will end. A third phase is very unlikely as the project objectives have now, we assume, been met. Any further drilling may then have a negative impact on the value curve. Just 10% extra investment for further exploration with time and operational costs will not necessarily return the same ratio of value from previous exploration.

Got it now cheers Andy

Gold inventories have increased to 1.77m base value, which is more then the previous year total revenue from gold sales.
Explains the reduced revenue figure this year!

AGM looking to be confirmed in July.

Lucky
Once identified, is generally referred to a porphyry, but if proven by drilling that it is mineralised and can be extracted if has economic value, then generally, referred to as a deposit or a porphyry type deposit or a ‘named’ deposit.
Was it the deep system suspected below ascot that was referred to as a semi-porphyry. Now being referred to as maybe being true.

Theiceberg did explain the geological reasoning behind the term so please check.

Lucky, they refer to racecourse too as a deposit and not a porphyry.
The follow-up Phase-Two drilling programme succeeded in defining a shallow high-grade ‘crown’ to the Racecourse deposit ………….

>>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. As with all porphyries, however, a full understanding requires much drilling to define the full potential and our projects are no exception. 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.

Would that imply AA are out of the picture? Or just a generalised term?

Very promising indeed, I hope we can all agree on that.

Andrew, LW my ‘reply’ was once again to give the opposing view to what was a negative post of a subjective nature. I find it quite surprising that a shareholder with 17million shares would want to filter another member for ultimately defending the position of the CEO and trying to promote reasoning behind continuing to have trust in your own research rather than from historical failings. I find the 10p value absurd, I understand where you are coming from but disagree as it implies my point as is shows a defeatist attitude before getting the facts.

Stevemocal- I didn’t say xtract had to accept on a legal point. in my opinion, if Anglo were to move with an early offer it would have to be seriously considered and would be difficult for any realistic offer to be turned down and will probably not reflect maximum value, that’s business.
It is summarised in the buy back agreement for good reason, and imo is indication enough to be of importance.

With respect
Guy

We know CB is capable of good comms, we also had a long period of inactivity from the company at end of phase 1 leading up to the conceptual pit release. With Colin explaining then why there was a need to keep quiet. So it’s not like it has happened before.

The last interview was only 3 weeks ago that’s hardly a lack of comms. To look closely as to why there is a need to keep ‘cards close to his chest’ he even ‘told’ us, that is what they are needing to do. There is a good argument to support the idea that Bushranger is indeed the huge resource it has the potential of being, with reason to suggest that the terms of the agreement that gives AA an opportunity to make an early offer before any of the other options are met by xtract, is the reason why it is now covertly being put together.

If an early offer was made, the asset could potentially be undersold as any early offers would have to be seriously considered. The clear and present uncertainty in size of resource will make that very difficult allowing xtract to increase the asset value to where they believe maximum value lies within the constraints of their chosen timeframe and budget, protected by the very terms of the agreement to do so.

It is such a unique position to be in, without the agreement in place it would be a completely contrasting approach to resource building, reporting and marketing for sure.

Yep defo a pattern! Was right the first time, can ‘some’ pre BR holders not see BR for what it is, where it is, how big it has become, how the average grades are positively inline with in ground copper values across the region, the significance of the gold system and understanding the basic principles and mechanics of the buy back agreement and how that is influencing the shift to non reporting of the resource sensitive news now. Above all, how Colin has been quite open and sincere all along. If this is all understood, they would have a different mindset than one of typical missed deadlines and promises that are influencing negativity now toward Colin. Bushranger has run smoothly from the start, any hiccups have been outside their control, like the early lab delays for assays, if in fact there were ever delays! Even covid didn’t stop the drilling. There has not been any reason to assume CB is up to old tricks.

Not wanting to sound provocative, but most of the ‘new’ investors would have ‘had to’ have thoroughly researched the company and the Oz asset to fully understand exactly what they were buying into.

I honestly believe ‘many’ of the LLLTH simply don’t have, the in depth research based knowledge of the project as many of us ‘new’ bunch, to see or understand what the company actually has now and what Colin is trying to do and needs to do to return the best value to all. 10p ffs

Cygnus- >> I expect they are already doing their homework and talking to CB even as we speak.

I agree there may already have been comms between them.

Back in may last year in podcast Colin was explaining how they couldn’t just declare a decision to mine, he said, “once you get into the hard numbers and models that we are doing, you can say we are starting an open pit and will develop the porphyrys from that pit, partially, we will sink a shaft, partially, so that one gets the benefit of the depth with the pit created.”

Now, wether this was Colin’s expectations back then of what was required to trigger that option, and since then, there has been some clarity from Anglo on what they are willing to accept, for xtract to exercise the mine option. Or, the groundwork is something that will actually be required!

I think generally, if AA want Bushranger, as long as xtract provide the models and pit design, they would be happy with that. It’s totally pointless breaking ground now, considering the amount of work required by AA before any actual mine development work is started with a project of this scale.

From 8.30mins

https://youtu.be/2WFUFdHX62Q

Thanks gixxer

Also, CB mentioned the decision to mine only a few weeks ago in Zak’s interim update saying, “ we are moving toward the decision to mine or 2MT, we haven’t decided yet.”

Wonder if the holding back of resource specific information that is evident now also would extend to the financial position of the company.

As has been stated by some that have heard from Colin in person, there is a ten day (I think) period from first approach that Anglo have to return with a decision of intent. Could the company be looking to extend reporting of audited results to have the opportunity to approach AA with as little transparency going into negotiations as possible?

The 2 month or so extra timeframe is coincident with the extension allowance for the years report.

If is the case wholly or even partly, does it mean we will not get any resource specific news until after they have learned of AA’s intent?

If I could offer one last observation on the differing opinions of the pre and post Bushranger investors, before I get too drunk :-]
Post BR investors have done their research and based on their risk aversion have spent their hard earned, buying primarily into the project.
Whereas pre BR investors had already bought into its other assets and had BR handed to them on a plate.

So I agree you are probably right Andrew in that it ‘is’ us post BR investors that have a blinkered view as we naturally are more protective of our own egos and anything negative that challenges what justified them decisions to buy in. Whereas the pre BR holders expectations maybe don’t need to be as high.

Thank you for the reply Andrew, that is what I was expecting back from you in response. I can only reiterate the difference with African ventures and problems usually associated with the territory, so no, not just Fairbride.

I do believe the Oz asset should be looked at from a fresh perspective, and evaluated on its own merit. Bushranger is no doubt the primary asset and all efforts are centred toward bringing it to market. That speaks volumes in itself.

The uniqueness of having targets set in a buy back agreement has totally changed the approach to how the increase in the resource is reported now the company are close to the finished programme of works. The now covert approach, ‘confirmed’ (using other words) by CB in interview has caused the most uncertainty amongst shareholders with no clues as to what they actually have now and is the root cause of most negativity. Certainly not because of duff results or bad news. It’s human nature anyway, a natural defence mechanism when one is not in control anymore. imo the feelings are just compounded from past experiences for the Shareholders pre bushranger.
It’s not a criticism, all opinions are valuable and to differ on them only promotes healthy debate. Thank you everyone for that and again to you too Andrew

It’s fair to say that some LTH have this blinkered view, Fairbride has driven a wedge of mistrust and lowering expectations of Bushranger with more chance perceived of under delivering. I don’t think that is fair to CB. You can only judge him after an overall outcome, not during! You cannot compare the time scale predictions of a development and start up mining operation in Africa to a simple bread and butter exploration programme in Australia, run by a hugely experienced geologist management team.

It is changing geologically, with each drill. So is understandable that exploration does not follow a specific path. And in this situation , I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest that it is acceptable to move the target date back as evaluation has shown that further work above and beyond what was initially expected is now required. Especially as it appears to be for a genuine growth opportunity for the project.

At this point he hasn’t missed any targets. It is true Andrew, we are all guilty of believing what we want to believe at times, gives me a warm fuzzy feeling, but we are all realistic in that belief, guided by interviews, RNS what we understand from our research combined.

A polite note-
I personally always try to give an objective view on current status, and maybe am lucky to not have judgement clouded by past affairs and difficulties, including financially.