Member Info for howezap

We have often heard ‘not the death of a thousand lashes’
But what does that even mean in terms of holes into a porphyry?

He has been quite clear in a previous podcast, long before the ‘perceived’ change of plan stating, they intend to join up some strike, dip, width to get an inferred resource at Ascot but not to delineate so it is left open ended in all directions.

Being left open ended in all directions could be construed as drilling but not by the death of a thousand lashes.
‘Not’ drilling to get part resource indicated, could also be construed the same. He has also used the phrase regarding RC before ascot was even touched. It really is a wishy washy comment and we’ve heard CB stopping himself a few times more recently from saying it.

On the other hand, an ‘indication’ of more extensive exploration beyond the phase 2 objective was plans to take on a couple of small African JV’s to help “fund the drilling efforts in oz.” As far back as last August he was already talking of fairbride income, hoping to underpin the exploration saying “that is the mission, it has always been the mission” Considering phase 2, certainly up to about 22k metres of drilling and modelling was fully funded.
I think now it’s more unlikely than likely that there will be further dilution.

So the clues are certainly there to be ‘interpreted’ that more extensive exploration was always going to happen beyond the original phase 2 objective from maybe an extended phase or a third phase.

So it comes down to if you are a glass half empty or a glass half full kind of person, in what you tend to want to believe in CB interviews I guess.

To me it just doesn’t hold water Andrew that the target has fell short of 2mt through trying to get there, when there is clearly up to a Km of potential strike with potentially higher grade and more gold likely, to add from the southern extension that will be shallow to surface the nearer to the sub fault line that runs between it and Ascot. ( courtesy iceberg analysis) so if holes 47 and 48 are dud it would also mean that iceberg analysis may be wrong too so doubt that. :-/
I’ll stick with my ‘alternative’ prediction ;-))

Ella I said ‘not necessarily because” …….
Making the point that it is very unlikely the southern extension is not mineralised

Lucky, I agree. You can see now why CB said it won’t be far off that, when Kevin Hornsby said just stick a billion dollar price tag on it!
Everyone has simply got to ask themselves if they knew it would potentially take longer beforehand would they still be invested?
Also is there a better investment out there or comparable at least?

Is there any other reason why southern extension has not been ‘further’ drilled yet to add to RC modelled resource?

There was every intention to test southern anomoly. Holes 41,42 and 43 were drilled but modelling showed the holes were sub optimal, the pads were sited using the historical more inferior IP, The potential at Ascot was already known from the first into it, hole 35 and subsequent holes 38,39 and 40 since prior to the three to test the RCsouthern ext anomoly. So it rules out the idea exploration simply just shifted to ascot while new pad permits approvals were being waited on.
Also thanks to Andmillsy research on NSW Titles, it is apparent that holes 47 and 48 were then drilled from the new pads at RCsouth ext although we have had no official confirmation of approvals or these holes summarised.

From 7mar RNS
>> On completion of the geophysics survey, and the granting of permission for the new drill pads, we will be better able to continue drilling the inferred extension of the Racecourse system to the south."<<

Again it suggests, likely to probable economic reasoning purely because the high value of the gold potential at Ascot and not necessarily because holes 47 and 48 cores were ‘possibly’ found to be poorly mineralised. And considering 47/48 were targeted using the drone EM over the latest more advanced IP with guidance too from previously sub optimally sited holes that showed they skimmed the edge of the porphyry and the mineralisation was further west where 47/48 were then sited. So is ‘very’ unlikely the geos got it that wrong!

Hate loose ends.

I agree that’s the whole big question regarding his timescale target. He has been very insistent on it , so I would guess once the conceptual pit and/ or 2mt is modelled they will start talks. Maybe that does not mean that, at that point the buy back process will be triggered. Meanwhile Phase 2 finishes, wether that includes ‘ALL’ the outstanding work to finally close off Rc south ext, a couple of holes to the north west, the infilling to the high grade crown, the drilling to further test the gold at Ascot and to drill to establish an inferred resource there plus footrot. That will be clearer soon I hope. But more likely after a break we could see a final 3rd phase to complete any remaining exploration that I personally doubt phase 2 will cover.
Once fairbride revenue is ramped up we could potentially see a return of a second rig once again.
Or… the company sell lock stock there and then if Anglo want to carry on with the project themselves.

Aeris
It shows the gold is a completely different system and will have far reaching economic advantages at processing with minimal to none separation advantages.

>>Colin Bird, Executive Chairman said: "I am very pleased with the results of this hole and intrigued by the dominance of gold. The obvious significance is that the Ascot prospect is a different prospect to Racecourse and our modelling is designed to pursue the indication that the gold and copper mineralisation could be separate. These results display similar characteristics to the gold-rich Ridgeway discovery in Newcrest's nearby Cadia-Ridgeway Mine, 25km to the SW from Orange, and less than 100km from the Bushranger project, in the prospective Lachlan Fold Belt.
 
Modelling is advancing at a pace, and to this end, we are modelling with a specific intent to identify copper and gold mineralisation trends and their spatial significance, designed to maximise opportunities and identify areas which could have material effect on the model.<<

Incidentally, there was always the intent to stick a hole or two into Footrot from the very beginning of phase 2!

Finally found a reference to wether the southern extension will get drilled or not, but more importantly, strong suggestion as to why.

To me it suggests they may have have stopped short of the 2m ton, although we don’t know for certain just yet, instead opting for the ‘decision to mine’ option for the purpose of fulfilling the agreement requirement. To re model the conceptual pit around it so Anglo can be approached potentially using their own internal estimates which was talked about on a different podcast as the full financial evaluation will not be able to be completed due to the planned infilling work.
In this one from 18th jan CB talks about the extent the mineralisation continues to north west and to the south. “

CB >> “What sort of pit are we looking at, I guess tier 1 premier league, we’re talking about 25 million tonnes a year over 20 years, thats the sort of thing I’m looking at where we are now. If it keeps going south and I’m sure it does, well, we know it does because it’s open ended, we’ll probably stick at 25 million tonnes a year but it won’t be over 20 years, it will be 25 or 30 years.” <<
BR from 6 mins
https://podcasts.google.com?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hdWRpb2Jvb20uY29tL2NoYW5uZWxzLzUwNjQ0MzcucnNz&episode=dGFnOmF1ZGlvYm9vbS5jb20sMjAyMi0wMS0xODovcG9zdHMvODAxNDc1Mg%3D%3D

So they obviously believe the extra tonnage is there to add if required so why stop.

Could there be a third phase to extend RC resource model further south?

Or is the potential now at Ascot why there has been a seeming shift to there with the discovery of the high grade gold. They are happy to stop with what they have at RC on an economic standpoint. Ascot, with the southern extension of RC, neither have been previously explored so both, would require similar levels of drilling to be inferred. There is more value to be returned drill for drill from Ascot. Knowing just the decision to mine will fulfil buy back requirement. ??

Not quite sure we are in disagreement Andrew. My interp comment is more to do with the projects directive toward targets, particularly where oz asset is concerned. Obviously we are still within the timescale set at present.

I refer once again to Jeremy Reid’s comment in the conceptual pit webinar. “Get to 2mt to see what they want to do”
All other references to targets since have not implied anything other than that in my interpretation of them now.

However, my overall expectations have changed after once again evaluating from my understanding of what the company are trying to achieve, as the project evolves with the potential now of greater returns. I’m sure xtract have had to evaluate what is best to do next. I can live with that, if it is going to take a bit longer, even if targets are missed. I’m not being naive, there has been nothing reported as of yet to suggest expectations of the company have fallen short or have convinced me otherwise. It’s just got bigger!

There’s no real relevance to the current share price, in which case there’s no real relevance to what CB says to try to drive the market cap up. Most of us are certain enough now that there will not be any more raises from share allocation. I look forward to the end game that’s what is important.

Jury is out on RC yes of course.
Sorry but you simply cannot drag up whatever happened in the past, different sector, different continent, different management team.
But however, in that case Colins track record and experience of successfully selling big assets should hold more credibility in consideration surely.

Research, invest, evaluate, evaluate , evaluate is my ideal.
I know it’s different for pre bushranger holders to a degree but it really shouldn’t be in an ideal world.

I don’t think it’s a case of wether or not what Colin says is believable, but more understanding how to interpret it, understanding what we know from our own research and how this whole AIM game is played.
Colin has genuinely been sincere in doing and saying what was necessary to drive this up. Right or wrong is subjective.

Be interested to know why you feel CB not been honest about eureka iceberg?
Briefly, had the amazing assays from deep drills. Plan to drill to extend open pit, and drill plan to test further deep sulphides. In interview, “The priority is to get cash out of it first” other than that it has been a waiting game.
Is there more I don’t know?

Can someone point out exactly where and at what CB has given false hopes for Bushranger as a whole where it has fell short of expectations from official RNS.

Bad disciples!

Going back to the 2mt or not 2mt debate. Has anyone else considered taking the main inferred resource only, ignoring what we know is the contained copper (0.31mt @0.3 cut off) working on its dimensions in metres taking a rough measurement from Google earth with average grade multiplied, using it to give a good representative example of where this crude way of estimating would compare to it?
Work with both 0.3 and 0.15 cut off using LxWxDx2.7x.003
Then do some juggling with the dimensions of the main inferred resource until matched.

Just does not make sense in perspective, it’s such an unreliable way of estimating. Andrews common sense approach is more reliable, even more so is stevemocals beer mat method (patent pending) first perfected in 2021
Think I worked it out to be around 7mt last night ;-))
Now mrs S has been pestering me while I’m relaxing on the terrace, asking if the pool can be extended??? Even though I told her no it’s not that simple, she said there must be an alternative?
After looking into it…. Tracy (36) from Bristol looks promising.

LW you’re opinion shared.

>> Modelling continues at the project, with the Racecourse prospect indicating that it has grades and tonnes justifying a rework of the conceptual open pit." <<. was in 17th May RNS

If you look from different perspective, the phase 2 objective was to get to 2mt with between 16-22k metres of drilling. With over 30k+/- drilled in phase 2 now, over 8.5k into Ascot you could deduce that that objective was successful. One footnote on that, infill drilling planned to the high grade crown will give more geological definition not to necessarily add more tonnage as has been suggested.

If not, why not continue to add from southern extension anomoly, which from icebergs analysis on the sub fault between RCsouth and ascot indicates the intrusion would be shallower to west of fault.
No mention of RCsouth further drilling, you could deduce from that that the objective was successfull.

What has been discovered at Ascot simply cannot be ignored, considering at Xmas the plan was to get away with 3-5 boreholes in CB’s first so called target.

Worst case, the decision to mine will cover any eventuality of tonnage falling short at RC if that is the case. ( which does not mean Xtract will mine it themselves or through any kind of JV) There is more value in drilling Ascot now than RC buck for buck. The significance of gold with potential for near surface that can be surface mined, and to extend into a deep system that when extent of pit is
at depth it leads to the whole scenario as will be RC, that the deeper gold and ore then becomes easily accessible carrying its own minimal CapEx as processing plant is all payed for which incidentally will be shared with RC

The overall LOM’s (new one, not often you ‘potentially’ see 2 tier 1 open cut mines side by side) will have a huge effect on influencing a major mining companies decision than a minimum target

This is big now, it could be enormous but will not be ours to build that legacy that is certain!

A positive thought going into the long weekend!
Since way back, before we we even got stuck in this range bound share price stagnation. It was generally considered then, that it will be the likes of an updated JORC, confirmation at least of 2mt or meaning-full income once fairbride is operational that would rerate market cap to get xtract over that ‘speculative’ hurdle. Not forgetting that many were more than happy at the suggestion that a 3rd phase of drilling would be acceptable if it were to add value were due!

Since then however, there are post covid and conflict, economic uncertainties that have stifled growth across the markets which hasn’t helped. Basically nothing has changed fundamentally since as it continues to be the above that will make the difference to share value.

The company is poised and ready for an upturn in sentiment within the sector, but more importantly when it finally has economic stability to per-sue self funded exploration when income is ramped up.

I feel the company are gearing up for a positive AGM and financial report of assets which will help a lot. These uncertainties will soon be left behind as the picture is made ever clearer.
ATB for the holidays
Guy

I’m sure ascot will have enough drilling for an inferred resource, it has certainly been suggested this from CB, besides, there is too much potential value to not have one to support the resource in any kind of valuation.
There needs to be more understanding of the high grade gold system/s. There is also how the moly will contribute as sounds as though will factor significantly being above average grade so far for the Lachlan fold. Also, a sizeable resource modelled from ascot but left open ended in all directions is my understanding.
As CB has suggested both could be large open cut mines it may be there will be more work to support ascot viability in that respect.

Mattyashy no Xtract don’t have to declare anything until they are ready. Apart from the fact xtract need to go down a certain path to manoeuvre Anglo into deciding. The minimum requirements are somewhat irrelevant now due to sheer scale of bushranger.

Re. over optimistic targets not being met!
April/ may if it goes over it will be by a month and not by quarters. By end of June maybe start to fret.
Waiting on assays for hole 52 amongst others there is clearly an advance in exploration beyond hole 52, could be on anywhere up to hole 60 by now!

Not fussed at all about moving targets, an ever increasing top class resource potential will warrant re evaluation , so if there has been, it is to increase asset value after all. When it happens it happens.
Bushranger sale is considered by many to happen by end of year, I believe that has not changed. Why would it have from nothing but positive results and news.

There are plans to further drill RC for high grade definition for CapEx recovery. With comment shifting “don’t know if it will be 2mt or the decision to mine” to now, “ we haven’t decided if will be 2mt or a decision to mine” With apparent no need for drillling to the southern extension, certainly where requirements of buy back agreement is concerned. Conceptual pit confirmed it is being re modelled.
They are obviously now confident of meeting the requirements to satisfy the agreement.

Regardless of however RC is interpreted, there would still likely be the drive to fully understand the copper and gold to increase the resource and in ground value. Is coming along just fine very positive.

These first holes are still discovery holes SL the potential is huge.

Awaiting assays for hole 52 amongst 5 others.
Confirming a continuation of drilling. I notice it is not on the latest drill map though.

It would appear drilling has not stopped

>>Drilling continues at Ascot to further define the extent of the mineralisation and determine a relationship to the Racecourse deposit<<

Not found the higher grade crown yet…..

100 times more! No that is ridiculous.
More like 400 times more.

Just banter good luck