Member Info for howezap

Hi cp yes tend to forget the hydro power generation arm, looking toward driving down costs at Nalunaq initially one would have thought.

I can recall back at the end of ‘24 I think it was, with Eldur referring to how aggressively the company were going to be toward growth. (Can’t recall exact words) this would no doubt occur concurrently across all corners of the business?

Round about the same time as his comment it was also reported that indications have given them the confidence there is a few million ounces of gold just in Nalunaq that tallied with what Eddie Wyvill had also said at the time

Thinking MRE5 could be stellar in light of the amount of drilling they had completed. I’m sure growth is still the buzzword so at MCap of just above 500m currently seems a baseline valuation pending much news.

When considering the bigger picture, today’s news as significant as it is just feels like mere housekeeping to set the company up toward its transition from junior to rubbing shoulders with bigger boys in through this really important growth phase.

Hi ROGGY if any one single person on here deserves to see a return I sure as hell hope it will be you.

One of the unfortunate things surrounding natural resources in general is that it lives in the now. When you consider the sheer scale of what Amaroq and its partners have to go at. Current reserves are the backbone of how Nalunaq will underpin its operations across its portfolio, for now at least until Black Angel can start generating revenue. This far more so than the price of gold which essentially just creates a higher free cash flow margin and gives more options with financing and gives greater operational flexibility.

I think where risk lies most in the successful exploitation of greenlands minerals are those surrounding its geology and geography. Not whether a sustainably higher gold price will remain.

“A mill or two isn’t going to get too far though. Does that cover 20206 in full? If so then what about 2027?”

To get the best value from a raise, they are going to want to have an exploration objective after the discovery of an ore body to start focussing on. That objective will be to potentially define it and produce an inaugural JORC resource with a loosely inferred resource with a raise needing to cover enough drills, metallurgy test work and desk study work to hopefully achieve that objective.

Would be looking at up to or north of 10m usd. Current market cap is over inflated anyway and as stakeholders will want a clear objective to back a raise of this amount. Due to the high risk burden funds raised for these purposes are rarely subscribed to at a premium to the 50mda share price. Usually done at a discount to it to guarantee take up.

But that is probably jumping the gun if they don’t shout from the rooftops they have made a discovery from this round of drilling.

But they simply cannot expect stakeholders to keep drip feeding a project of this scale a couple or 4 mil at a time without solid material results.

There is plenty to be positive about to keep the momentum going. I would be certain the company would release a new presentation with possibly a webinar alongside results of the last campaign that we all hope are astounding.

Hi mrT

When you say

“I think copper faces a bottleneck which will throttle electrification and in turn the AI revolution.”

A bottleneck would imply there is an overburdance of copper supply that overtakes demand. But I know what you mean, not trying to be pedantic. But your post is a good cue to repost this.

A must watch

Robert Friedland speaking at the Future Minerals Forum in Saudi on copper. But also lists Antimony as a critical mineral for the rising demand in AI tech.

Also, some incredible innovation that could replace conventional crusher and processors for new developments and even for existing operations to upgrade, by literally reducing energy consumption by 80%, one of the highest costs of a mining and processing operation.

https://youtu.be/ZiesaxJiVlk

Kev Hornsby has reported back that Silverking is ‘progressing at pace’ after speaking to Oval mining in Lusaka on Friday. Oval are the mining contractor.

All good so far looking to be on track for delivering first concentrate and plant commissioning within what should be now a fairly reliable timeframe given, considering the bulk of the plant and tailings dam has already been built.

I wonder if management had waited to be sure that procurement of and installation of the critical components were completed so they could be more assured of giving the market a reliable timeframe and more importantly, be confident of delivering on time.

Bodes very well for the Moroccan mine also, if you consider Wildstone have been developing their company toward small scale mining already so it is not as though XTr are having to go at it from scratch. Wildstone will be on the MF case!

It’s all very well having right geological architecture and lithology that acts as precursors for the presence of metals. But there is a big difference to finding and identifying a concentration of copper and gold within that setting where efforts can then ultimately be focused on to prove to the ‘global’ marketplace they have made a viable discovery one drill at a time.

Those are not commercial grades, they are focussing their exploration efforts now on identifying a deeper much higher grade system that can hopefully be big enough to support economics for an underground operation.

Wishbone will need to prove there is geological and economic justification to proceed toward a low level study which may then attract a partner to help fund ongoing work.

The idea of finding another Havieron and overnight selling the project at a 400% premium to the current share price is fanciful and just ramping when they are clearly developing infrastructure to support ongoing exploration for many years ahead.

“80% buy in to Antimony mining and processing operation in Morocco.”

The ownership structure of the Moroccan joint venture is ‘not’ a JV, xtract had aquired 50% initially increased now to 80% ownership of Wilsdstone. Who were already establishing as a small scale mining and exploration company.

So this ‘subsidiary’ is a 80% owned entity of Xtract who have become the parent company, so that would mean cost savings with tax efficiencies and pooling of their resources with management having far more influence and control over decision making and operational oversight compared to a JV where project management is generally shared which can lead to conflicting expectation on budget, timeframe or even different expectations on returns if JV partners are not aligned.

So as Wildstone and XTr do not already have a working relationship already, there will be none of those risks , it will be far more streamlined.

With a JV the operational risks are more shared but with the high profile of Antimony being on the REE critical list and with Xtract’s appetite for taking a risk ( it’s the game we’re in !) plus it aligns with the companies growth strategy so the subsidiary option is a really good one on the face of it , to have aquired company over just project.

Loads of news to come soon,

Geophysics results,

Maiden MRE

Mining agreement and project update.

Since ‘25 cb has delivered a current 51% stake of highly prospective large scale exploration tenements tied to and including a separate 35% buy in on a small scale mining and processing operation that will be delivering first ore to the brand new on site modular plant within 3 months.

Delivered a successful reconnaissance campaign which has now triggered a phase two exploration programme coming this year focusing on target anomalies found on ‘all 5’ Western Foreland licences. Not just on 1, but on all 5!

GLR yet to confirm any anomalous targets on their licence for follow up drilling.

80% buy in to Antimony mining and processing operation in Morocco.

Although just waiting on final agreements tbc. But has delivered a potentially lucrative opportunity none the less.

My last post was in part to highlight the importance of converting resource into reserves which they will be doing now with regularity each year. The data from close spaced drilling improves confidence and allows that conversion.

Through MRE5 and the updated reserve statement and mine plan they should begin to see potential of how increases in ore will be delivered and from any new mining fronts to eventually ramp up production to 450t per day with addition of another processor and flotation in a year or so.

Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic

viability, nor have any mining modifying factors been applied. It’s not the increase in resource that pushes out the mine life it is the reserves. So hoping to see more significant conversion to the indicated category with some in the measured this time.

‘24 exploration season data that made up MRE4 was considered at the time to be quite extensive with a total of 2,985m of surface core drilling testing target block extension, 374m on the mountain block and from 203 outcrop samples with this work still just validating the geological model. Although MRE4 increased mine life from 6-10 years, this is not a robust mine plan.

Compare that now to ‘25 season data with 4166m of surface drilling and more importantly increasing geological confidence toward a more robust mine plan now with conversion of more resource to ore reserves from 2127m of infill drilling.

62% of this drilling intersected mineralisation in the Main Vein giving it that weighted average grade of 87.6g/t Au that really starts to now de risks near term production being sustained.

Add to that the extension drilling potential I wouldn’t even hazard a guess to resource growth.

Hi Archangeleyes I posted this below recently and is indicative of the type of results to be expected in general.

This initial drill phase of the ‘deeper’ anomalous EM survey signatures that they are testing now, are reconnaissance in nature. They are more to understand the mineralisation with the data from them used to update the geological model that is overlayed with all the previous ground and air survey data to ‘then’ be able to more accurately target grade and continuity better in later rounds.

The geological team would not expect to hit high grade mineralisation first time round, it is not the purpose of recon drilling to chase high grades. So shareholders should certainly not expect them to be high grading over long intercepts without this initial data to be able to interpret the geo model.

This is standard normal stuff and essential to get best value per metre of drill core over the coarse of later programmes.

It is fact that most geologists dont hit any mineralisation with first one or two sighters, but rest assured every single new hole gives invaluable information to the modellers.

These essential early drills can be and quite often perceived by the market as disappointing, as for example can the drills trying to find the extremities of an ‘identified’ ore body, due to grade drop off.

You are all at the start of a long but exciting exploration story!

Positive indicators of the upside potential that MRE5 will deliver. The weighted average grade of 87.6g/t Au from resource conversion drilling verified higher grades than the resource model predicted will have a positive uplift in resource grade and convert more resource to ore reserve.

“Amaroq’s technical team has strengthened its understanding of the deposit through detailed geological work, including the development of the bespoke Dolerite Dyke Model, which has improved the effectiveness of drilling targeting from surface, looking to  counterbalance the “nugget effect”, in order to achieve more consistent drilling results.”

So the success of this will have created better value overall returned per metre of drilling and reflect in the overall grade and tonnage of the resource estimate.

A 51% uplift from MRE3-MRE4 was outstanding which included a maiden indicated category so future conversion to reserves will be more systematic now pushing out the mine life further ahead of the mine. It will de risk the mine more significantly more than MRE4

Hey Daffy that is a somewhat moot response they could have said any number of different things. I’m just trying to keep it factual, I’m not being negative I still have a smallish position here, as the volatility is opportunity!

Anyone with any understanding of what will be required for wishbone to show economic credibility and technical feasibility for GGP to be remotely interested will appreciate they are going to have to find something particularly special due to depth penalty. Currently near surface mineralisation would not be commercial to send for toll processing so wishbone is a high risk but could be extremely high reward investment ‘not’ for the risk averse particularly so at current market cap entry until some solid assays are returned to at least de-risk even marginally.

“Today's rns said....we remain happy with the assays seen to date...

It didn't say ..very happy

Any views”

Hi JJN

It didn’t even say that, mead said - We remain happy with what we have seen to date in the 2025 ‘drill core’

Just to be clear. 😉

Gixxer, considering the first part of your ‘findings’ was your actual prompt you put into AI ,what was you expecting. I’m not sure if you are doubting my integrity or my knowledge, or both! But can assure you I don’t and have never ‘researched’ using Ai, but from respected internet sources, technical reports and academic research papers.

Ultimately though you have just shown that my analysis was correct on this occasion so thank you and welcome members to do the same thing in backing up with their own research on anything that is posted as factual. But suggest don’t use AI

Sorry eastern missed this but just to clarify.

……..things were all good and the future was positive, that is until another regular poster did the maths and Bushranger was found to be bare. It has been mothballed…..

That other regular poster you mentioned, steve4077 specifically , their analysis was flawed from the beginning. They compared the previous mining study which used the resource model which included the old JORC resource and resource that was in the resource model that didn’t make it into the JORC against the new upgraded JORC resource ‘only’ that doesn’t include any extra resource that didn’t make it into the new JORC distorting the final figures.

The fact that the resource didn’t fulfill expectations for reasons i have already stated actually has no correlation to their ‘final’ analysis although yes, it had the same outcome. As for being mothballed, it is of course a subjective view but BR is certainly not bare.

Hi Eastern,

In SK, XTr original JV with Cooperlemon is for the wider large scale exploration license which they have now met their buy in threshold. This latest JV is to participate in small scale mining to grow the project toward a bigger resource.

This falls outside the terms of the original JV on wether or not delineation of a much bigger resource or not is identified as that aspect of the JV terms cannot possibly be determined as exploration hasn’t really even started toward producing an inaugural JORC let alone a more definitive JORC.

‘Overall’ project ownership cannot be easily determined at this point because it is not yet known what further investment will be split between JV parties later.

That’s my best shot unless anyone else has a different understanding.

Apols for the low blow, anything to encourage some constructive debate. You do have my respect if it means anything. And i do take any criticism seriously as i have been a consistent poster throughout. But have never exaggerated knowingly, lied or given share price predictions along the way.

No I’m not if you bothered to keep up with my historical posting you would see i have repeated my understanding before and long before AI has come to be popular more recently. Nice try