Member Info for howezap

A methodical approach to increasing the resource has been my thought on how they might progress. Would hope for incremental JORC revisions as resource increases. It would certainly help share price stability and investor confidence.
Does not put a valuation on the asset but will give a foundation to base investment on for new investors entering at higher levels.

Cyberiachas. Always prudent to be conservative in estimates so as not to be accused of being rampy. I feel there is so much more scope the parameters can be increased by, to realistic, although not being overly optimistic values.
The economic cut off could eventually be lower than .15 on final evaluation. The resource maybe 4mt-6mt considering the size of the south east anomaly, along with the parallel zone, footrot etc. The projected long term price of copper could be way off at 7-8000k. Once 2023 hits, are we likely to ever see copper prices fall below 9 or 10k again? The remaining value of the percentage paid of the asset may be 4-5% considering, all aspects of which value is based on, are probably at very top end of each scale. Lastly let’s not forget if an decent sized IOCG occurrence is identified at Eureka. CB is certainly confident going by his comments on ‘an evening with.’ Dips at 45 degrees with copper values of plus 5% which are unlike a normal copper system and point to IOCG. What would that add to market cap alone in 18 months time! Not forgetting full forecasted revenue streams incoming by end of ‘22.
Anyone dare do the math, and post a possible, but still realistic share price prediction. That really would be a positive forecast for the weekend.
Go on you know you want to, give us all something to dream of before a 7am monday news bomb.

Cygnus- Good post on ADVFN -23/10/21@10:27 worth consideration to answer your question??

Must admit not knowing the first thing about taxation.
Any potential tax concessions gained from the sale of the subsidiary would be a short term gain would it not?
Retaining the exploration rights of other tenements could prove to be of far greater value in long run. Considering the desirability of not only being in the Lachlan fold belt, but also the copper dominant Rockley-Gulgong sub belt.

Ella.
Do you mean racecourse project on its own, as bushranger copper gold project covers all tenements?
So if Prospect Ore is sold it would include all tenements.
I would hope these would be retained for future exploration, so yours is a good point of discussion.

Montyfino
Anglo have a once only opportunity before 2mtCuEq is confirmed to make an offer before it falls away.

>>Anglo have a once-only opportunity to exercise the 80% buy-back whether the opportunity comes through the discovery of 2 million tons of contained Cu equivalent or a decision to mine

Where the agree is concerned it does not appear to be subject to third party valuation. It is not likely whatsoever now as the resource will be way beyond this threshold. Also, if they were to make an early offer and was turned down by xtract, they would lose the right of first refusal that forms the main part of the agreement

>> Under the terms the Bushranger Acquisition agreement, if a deposit of greater than 2 million tons of contained Cu equivalent (e.g. 450Mt @ 0.45% Cu equivalent) is ultimately identified, Anglo may buy-back 80% of the Racecourse deposit at fair market value as determined by an Independent Expert in accordance with the JORC and Valmin Code

It is very likely the south east anomaly, the parallel zone, footrot and potentially any other “feasible” anomalies identified later will all add to the overall resource that will be offered to AA. CB has stated previously they will not sell cheaply, and is very unlikely to enter into a JV.

Even without AA having an interest in the region at present, with potential scale of this asset,I really do not see this as a problem. Will be a trump card in their deck to have and to have acquired from right under newcrest’s nose, who are certain to be interested being 70k up the road at cadia

Great talk from CB, the Q&A after must have been worth attending for.

One comment was intriguing,
“We are going to be talking soon about a couple of other projects”.

Interesting, just goes to show there’s ambition beyond racecourse and the potential for growth as the company evolves.
Will certainly take profits from a sale but could be a compelling case for continued or further investment down the line.

If racecourse isn’t enough to comprehend.

Is difficult to fully grasp potential of an evolving company like xtract. Unless you have a firm price target then that’s fine. With these assets with potentially, that once in a lifetime opportunity for most or two if eureka comes up trumps.
There is some decent longevity from here with good potential beyond a buy out of racecourse.
All or nothing was quoted regarding footrot I believe. The other tenements that are not in the buy back agreement will give some good leverage in negotiating with AA or any other major. I would not understand if all these were given up as part of racecourse buy back. Why would a major take them? They buy proven assets they don’t explore them. It may be a further buy back deal is agreed on adjacent tenements with a premium paid on racecourse.
Eureka is a serious consideration for continued investment too, another company changing asset in the making if proven IOCG.
I will keep evaluating but hope to hold for a sale then look at it again and decide.
Lots of upside and opportunity for all investors. Long or short.

Or Steve needs another job.

Talking of storms, I dug out ground for a new tennis court yesterday, came in this morning , the client now has a big rectangle shape pond :)

I don’t believe they are necessarily required to release assays if they are collating them towards the revised pit model which will be available soon I would hope

Quoted over on the dark side.

>>Not forgetting fuel is rising in price hence large volume low grade mining is going to look a lot less attractive in coming
years.

This deramp made me initially laugh, smacks of desperation! Although…..is a new angle, unlike the usual negative opinions that get regurgitated, so it’s got to be worthy of asking the question,
Is there any credibility to this statement?

Would agree shorn I would say it’s a future objective. It does go to show how project objectives can shift within an exploration phase. Footrot being one example. One could argue that it still hasn’t been discounted but the paragraph from 2nd sept RNS focussing EM on new south east target suggests to me they not going to footrot. Also, at the time the webinar came out the objectives were to drill the higher grade parts of the central part of the resource, the south east anomoly and also the parallel zone. Which, from drill targets for remaining holes discounts the parallel zone.
Is proving to be a methodical approach to proving up the asset without getting too far ahead of themselves and risk the market further misunderstanding significance of data. Keeps objectives clearly understood in proving up the 2mt+ with the confidence the threshold can be met from less of what has been identified.

From 2/09 RNS >> · Processing/modelling of the drone-mounted magnetic survey at Racecourse will continue, with a focus on the new south-eastern target indicated by hole BRDD-21-014

Just wanted to clear up a point that maybe of confusion. The anomaly to east/ south east that is being focused on ‘now’, is the saddle, and the main resource referred to by CB. The anomaly just further south (the most southerly) which is referred to as, the parallel zone of mineralisation. This is ‘not’ being drilled yet, but has been confused with being the south east anomaly. However it will be interesting to see if this ‘further’ anomaly will be a further extension to open pit making it potentially 3.5km long or a separate pit. Could be an absolutely humongous resource with CB suggesting a mine life of maybe 75years!!!
Reference from Sunday roast very positive comments.

Webinar conceptual open pit. https://youtu.be/AEIwR_0S7SE

Agree Ella
Colin mentioned at some point during the first 8000m they would stick a hole in footrot.
With emphasis now on drilling the south eastern anomaly, it’s apparent that the confidence the team have in extending the open pittable resource has taken precedence as the project scales up.
Is unlikely any EM drone surveying would have been done at footrot as the purpose was to use it to help targeting a recon hole into it.

Welcome back Gixxer the question of your whereabouts did come up

What is assuring to know, is that the pit is looking to still be further increased beyond 2mt as the outer margins of the ore body are still to be delineated. Big enough tonnage to be economically mined as a stand-alone asset, so a potential sale would be likely in any case. It would act as a back stop even if the southern main body has no mineralisation. There is a fair degree of de-risk now as is not reliant on the need to include any of the southern intrusion.
But as the surveying has shown greater understanding of the targets from the signatures it is more likely than not it will be viable wether as a ‘further’ pit extension, a separate open pit or an underground mine. Any which scenario will be of great interest to AA as would make their re-investment more economic through sheer scale.
Feels like it’s a free punt from here now.

Thank’s again news, for sharing your insight is appreciated.
There was one standalone comment you signed off with that struck me as being significant in understanding the predicament that exploration miners and majors alike are facing in the search for the next super mines.

>> “BHP used to want SAFE TIER 1”

With fewer new large viable discoveries being found in the ‘safer’ jurisdictions such as North America, Australia and British Columbia. (As quoted by CB) Is this not a consequence of the lack of these discoveries as they become more scarce? The crux of it is, the search has had to broaden to meet the demand to supply the renewables and EV, copper and battery metals ‘industrial revolution’ over the next generation.

“All major miners including BHP, want ‘safe’ Tier 1 first and foremost.”

With the potential that Racecourse deposit has, it’s ideal location in terms of utilities nearby, infrastructure and political friendliness. With it now being on the radar of all the majors. It certainly puts the BOD in a favourable position, and I have the confidence in them to per-sue maximum value from exploration and returning it to shareholders by whichever means. At present the only variable that could impact the ability to achieve maximum value is lack of sufficient revenues incoming which we should get confirmation of by the year end. I would then consider re-evaluating my position. But until then all the risks that could jeopardise the future project are minimal. Even down to the confidence that further porphyry’s will return similar grades as generally are found to be of a consistent average across the belt. Also, the appointment of two highly experienced geologists to lead the project and a CEO with the business acumen and experience in selling on a resource, make this a serious and real investment opportunity that’s of lower risk in relative terms to what is a very high risk sector. These opportunities do not come along often for miners and investors alike.

Could not agree more jwoz about theiceberg, what could be any better for his credibility than an appraisal from CB himself on Zak’s podcast!
Can recall a previous podcast in phase 1 when Zak scoffed at Colin for mentioning the forum, which he often does, saying, “you can’t believe anything you read on the bulletin board”.
Do wonder what Zak made of CB’s comment this time.

Disagree about HT he brings the comedy factor but, he just doesn’t realise it.

Builder to former builder banter tony ;)

Many thanks for the discussion news, very insightful, an idea that has not been considered in that depth before. Is all very helpful so folk can form their own opinions.
I will bow out now as could not add further as is just speculative at this stage after all
Keep ‘em coming

There are so many possibilities for this to play out Steve. Incoming revenue will play an important factor. I think CB’s confidence in this revenue incoming is apparent in that he has once again openly debunked the idea of a JV.
I’m with you, early retirement beckons so to a degree I hope you are right but my understanding is this will take a little longer to play out. 23-24 of course that is arguable and wether a separate deal is brokered where selling the mine and associated resource whilst retaining rights for further exploration of tenement may even be viable.
But what a position to be in.

News
Fully respect your insight, I can only draw on what I have learned to form an opinion. It’s really interesting how you put it and could be credible.
My opinion is based on CB’s suggestion that a JV is not in their interest and his expression that we will not be stopping short of 1billion tonnes paints a strong picture that this project will not have conclusion until ‘23-‘24. There is so much to explore with the potential of a 500m+ mc
Just to save a few million expenditure to further explore and prove up, to get a quick sale and miss out on many hundreds more millions more, would frankly ‘P’ me me right off.
I have faith in CB he will keep to his word.

It’s not the first time I have been known for my naivety though
Not forgotten, NTM ;)