Member Info for howezap

We have the creek that runs through the middle of the resource that will need diverting. A creek is a stream in oz whereas over here (uk) it is more a channel. The technological and environmental considerations will be dealt with in a full feasibility study I believe as pre-feasibility is more the economic viability.
Cannot find any mention of potential issues regarding the creek. But would be sure the company is on top of it if there were.

Edit- 2011 scoping study.

Been looking into any environmental or legislative issues that could hamper any final plan for a surface mine. Doesn’t appear to be any major environmental regulation changes in NSW.
With ever changing societal expectations though, of land, sea and air management, that could eventually lead to less large open pit mines in the future.
Their impact on the environment is far worse than cave mining, more aesthetically imposing, noisier, more dusty, there can be issues with water discharge and vast amounts of process wastes. These issues are the main challenges facing surface mining.
We can be thankful of being in a very, mining friendly jurisdiction, having neighbouring large open pit mines already in the region. At a time when the need for copper in particular will be in very high demand with that demand far outstripping supply within ten years. Thus putting pressure on mining companies and governments alike, to realise any new discoveries.
The feasibility study in 2011 on Racecourse deposit was very positive and there should be no reason to believe a new study on any new ‘potential’ proposals will not be returned positively when that time comes.

It’s a given the company will need to do a lot more drilling beyond phase 2. We are still in the early stages still as quoted by CB.
Infilling has been suggested already using all, or some of the next 12000m if the grades are supportive. They will be sticking a recon hole in footrot too if that plan has not changed. I believe they will aim to get a revised JORC for the increased central part of resource which should underpin the work to date. This being one catalyst for a rerate that should ensure less dilution if further fund raise is required. Confirmation of income from other assets being another catalyst.
Using the term dilution comes across as a negative. Fund raises are part and parcel of exploration mining. There are two types of fund raises. The first is where a company is generally just keeping afloat. In our instance a ‘potential’ further raise is to add overall value to the company, investing in itself to turn that 1-2% into multiples of that, that would not be achieved without that cash injection wether it be from a raise or from money lenders. It’s not ideal if it happens but not unexpected if revenue incoming later in Q4 falls short due to delays or otherwise.
The resource I believe will then be methodically increased, next being the extension to south east and then to east with JORC revisions being classified accordingly and remodelling of the open pit plan.
My opinion of course but makes sense to be able to put progressive firmer valuations on the project as we enter into latter stages of exploration.

Hottesttony you did say that in your last post. Could you ask Hottesttony why he thinks there will be resistance at 7p and why Hottesttony has started referring to himself as the third person? ;)

Littlewing- very much agree with most of your last post. But, we simply do not have a proven 2mt to offer at present. Maybe by year end if the BOD decide to get a increased JORC revision if was decided to infill drill as was suggested by CB. If so, will be likely the first revision with others to follow as the proven resource increases on the way to hopefully 3+ mt

Very well put NtoM slowly but surely all the pieces are coming together and with further strong news from Africa that will see the much needed and necessary revenue streams coming in, should see a strong run to the end of year if all is well.

Would have been good to have got to understand what the protocols CB referred to were about. Hopefully followed correctly this time and we suffer no delays.
Anyone??

CE- To start a small scale pit focussing on the very shallowest of ore at racecourse and to share a processing plant nearby to get some income to start up scaling, to me sounds like it would take even longer and cost more to get to maximum production levels required to pay for CapEx and start turning a profit. The economics would dictate the start up and construction planning phases to maximise the way to revenue and onto profit.
Can’t see a half hearted approach to what is potentially one of the largest discoveries in oz in recent times.
SL- Was mentioned a while ago about hanging onto footrot. If it is proved to be a shallow mineralised part of the system, it could then be potentially mined by xtract so who knows.

How would the decision to mine effect the investment opportunity here?
To satisfy the Anglo Option to mine, buy-in, CB has stated in a previous interview “they would need to show a genuine intent by showing all the modelling, provide the hard numbers, they would need to start developing the porphyry partially, and sink a shaft partially, so they get the benefit of the depth with the pit created.
Xtract, AA, along with any potential money lenders would certainly need to know what we actually have so a proven ore reserve and feasibility would be required anyway before the above decision would even happen.
Xtract are not in a financial position to take on the expenditure on its own over the next 5-10+yrs while the mine is being created, dependant on the extent it would need to be cut, up to the point where Anglo show intent. So is a Joint venture with them a possibility to put up the capital to fund creating the mine? I would say that infrastructure would have to be seriously considered too. Concurrently engineered as would be done if the mine were to be created by any mining company. What if we created the open pit and AA then decided not to invest if there were no JV?
I could be way off, just my thoughts as to why CB seemed very dismissive of the idea when he spoke about triggering AA’s decision to mine option buy-in.
The other option is going it alone. Pretty much as above but likely to be funded by an investment fund. The only reason I can think of that the company would choose to do this is if the resource fell well short of any of the majors minimum size requirements for them to be interested. That’s not likely to happen.
So, if and when the company establishes an ore reserve that will support a viable extended mine, and show the economics to then tap into deeper parts of the system later on. With decent grades the mine alone may not be far off hitting the 2mtCuEq threshold. I would be hoping for a sale of a tier 1 mine once we have exploration success of the Racecourse deposit EL5574. Don’t mind waiting a couple of years to sell. Not so keen to be tied in for many years to come, chasing that multi bag.
In my opinion I don’t think they have any intention of mining it themselves, even though they have stated a few times now the possibility of doing so. I share the opinion of a poster over on the dark side that, “they have to be seen to be capable of doing it and have the potential to do it.”Bit of posturing to gain market confidence perhaps.
Assays next…. before we start digging a big ‘ole

Would say we are still in the early ‘1-2 year discovery stage’
Where xtract are concerned this interpretation of a mine life may not be that relevant anyway considering a sale of the asset is still more likely at the moment.
With any of the potential directions the project could go, would still require the resource to be a proven reserve which will take time yet before any of them decisions will be made.

You could be right about a definitive drill plan. I felt the one we got was to appease the shareholders to a degree. We wouldn’t have anything to discuss on here if there was no interpretation.

Initial drill planning is always subject to change dependant on what is being reported back from site and ‘possibly’ from further evidence from the drone geophysics. The latter RNS stating a hole would test strike length would supersede any previous planning if that is the case.
Certainly looking forward to that particular update when it lands. Could potentially start a buying frenzy once again.
I agree Steve it’s not clear at all from the model.

Yes you are totally correct leprechaun they are testing for strike length. lesson learned there, always read the RNS to the end

Regarding the two holes we are currently waiting an update on. I would say any preliminary holes into the south east extension would go full depth of any evident mineralisation. The geophysics survey by drone would have been used to further define porphyry depths and specific targeting of recon holes
Opinion only of course

Dare I ask if anyone has worked out it’s scrap value being 5.5 ton!!!!
Come on, you must have all thought it too:)

LEXION am a little ‘disengaged’ myself this morning and was somewhat confused when I looked out the window to see that my car had made its way home all by itself!
I can only imagine Ellas disappointment to wake up to two bulk bags of core samples plonked in her driveway :o
(Daughters collected car btw)

Ella>>>>I am hoping for some gold. A couple of those bulk bags shouldn't be that expensive to freight ;-).
Prob more expensive than you would think considering they are of each a cubic metre and would weigh nearly 20 ton each :)
I like your thinking tho, the first holes in particular would appear to be favourable from where they have been targeted near the historically stronger gold grades.

Thank you to our resident math guru A444444 ‘was never my strong point! ;) Is always appreciated and of some reassurance to know the boss has topped up again on open market with his own cash.
Winding up to be an exciting few months that should see a more respectable market cap. Starting Tuesday (maybe) with drilling update that could be quite significant if shows good runs of mineralisation.
Happy thoughts

Doh! The footrot RNS 13july