Member Info for howezap

Dipsard- I don't care whether he is fake or genuine, better to put forward a rational counter argument to such posts than appearing defensive IMO.

Couldn’t agree more, I also find that the posters that turn up that tend to ask the most demanding questions or continually challenge the status quo, are sometimes the best for steering your research in a different direction to potentially spot something or an opportunity you had maybe missed before.

Prime example from an obvious trader that drive me toward looking into range trading and subsequently was able to more or less get my portfolio back to black.

All opinions are valid and any member has the right to one, so should not be discounted straight off!

Western oz have the DMIRS system

Can be ‘very’ difficult to navigate and you may need to stretch the truth but if is of interest to anyone, knock yourselves out!

* Drill‑hole data (collar/survey/logs/assays): Drillhole datasets (collar locations, downhole logs, assays) are commonly available via MINEDEX, WAMEX, or DMIRS drilling datasets and via SLIP/WA data catalogue. These are not the same as permit approval documents but contain drill location and technical details.

How to view them (practical steps):

1. Search DMIRS Tenement/Document holdings (Mineral Titles Online / MTO) for the tenement and open its lodged documents — look for “drilling approval”, “Program of Works (PoW)”, or “notice of intent to drill”.

2. Use the DMIRS/SLIP ArcGIS MapServer layers (TENGRAPH) to locate drill collar points and then cross‑reference the tenement/documents. Example: query tenement by area, then check attached “Documents” or “Conditions” fields.

3. For petroleum wells, search the Petroleum & Geothermal Register (PGR) / WAPIMS well lists and view permit/approval entries and well reports.

4. For historical exploration drill logs and assays, search WAMEX (company reports) and MINEDEX or the WA data catalogue (some files are downloadable).

Haven’t tried yet myself but let me know how you get on.

Did point out on the 3rd the likelihood of a second rig being RC which will now give them more accuracy and optionality with orientation.

RE: Hole 1 vs Hole 2 drilling3 Oct 2025 12:23

The only time a second rig would be bought in would theoretically be an RC rig, from a new permitted pad to reach the proposed ore body at its depth, the hole would be collared and the Diamond core rig would carry on down to final depth. DD is far more costly than RC drilling. But even with this ‘potentially’ more economic approach it is doubtful any previously untested areas would be permitted for drilling if there are already collared holes across the targeted area to have to pre drill down to depth with a different orientation that drill permitting would be far easy to obtain.

They would never bring in a second DD rig in a reconnaissance round of drilling. As a junior, it is highly improbable that a second DD rig would be brought in, even for any later resource definition and infill drilling.

NSW gov have a Titles Management System portal that am able to access and lift permitting, drilling and license info but cannot seem to find access to a similar portal for WA. I’ll try again later.

Hi JB, to release positive drill results if they want the share price to go up are the actions of a junior explorer. The share price will take care of itself from commodity price trend, company FY guidance until quarterly results confirm otherwise and the current mine plan.

Any extra working or development capital will now be raised from bank credit or equity funding. So there is no necessity for dilutive funding. Until the company can produce solid consistent quarterly’s, an updated reserve statement and mine plan next June and the Havieron DFS with costings and schedules the share price is likely to remain volatile.

Selective negative pointers? Careful now, think the down grading of FY 26 forecast and lack of drilling results, you are clearly not considering these are usual and very normal operational actions of a mid tier producer. Transparency the former and normal practice the latter, not to be confused with Greatlands days as an exploration company.

Sorry, no idea lucky I had been searching for something and a Ai search came back with it. The website confirmed their royalty but didn’t check the validity of the quarterly.

Not a mine yet , but for all you gold worms Racecourse does have decent gold credits, particularly in the higher‑grade portion, quoted in the pit-constrained scenarios ~230,000 oz Au in 162 Mt at the higher cut‑off. Worth a buck or two.

Out of interest I found this if any avid number crunchers out there would like to share what we may have missed out on.

Manica revenue-

For the quarter ended June 30, 2025, Empress Royalty reported revenue of $2,737,715. This revenue was primarily derived from the following streams and royalties: $1,543,234 from the Tahuehueto silver stream, $459,520 from the Sierra Antapite gold stream, $517,604 from the Manica gold royalty, and $217,357 from the Galaxy StreamEMPR_2025_....

Payments to Empress under the Royalty Agreement are based on 3.375% of the revenues generated from the sale of gold from the Project until a total of 95,000 oz of gold have been sold. Thereafter, the percentage shall reduce to 1.125% and shall continue into perpetuity.

Yes Aeris, ‘after’ the dilution for BR drilling. The fact remains that Colin has stuck to his words and further dilution has not followed toward any African ventures since. So unless you are going to dispute content in my post I don’t appreciate the attack and attempt to side track by pointing at BR which I never mentioned.

As for what they were persuing at the time, the disposal of Manica has allowed them to acquire further projects plus through JV ‘s without dilution in line with the very strategy that is unchanged, in black and white on the company website.

I have worked tirelessly toward getting my portfolio out of the red and have never blamed anyone else. I don’t profess to know it all, but know enough to own my investment in the company and in its mission, so please don’t compare us.

But for the record I had said many times including before the RC JORC that the success of BR will not be measured from how much it will be sold for, but whether or not it will be sold. My opinion on this has not changed.

I have a really good memory and have also taken extensive notes from fairly deep research as I’m sure JDAU has done also. I’m not going to just ignore the facts when I can challenge anothers baseless and repetitive opinion.

I am happy with the progress the company is making as I am happy with the opportunity the downturn has given me toward bringing my average down and getting in cheap elsewhere too.

Hoping it will ‘start’ to finally come good by year end.

Also considering that the overall company strategy in pursuing copper and critical metals, has not changed or deviated since Colins arrival, so inheriting Manica when joining, you could have realised it was always going to be the most likely outcome to dispose of it with applying that same benefit of hindsight.

1/ You have that long term strategy toward copper and battery metals, that does not include gold.

2/ the company were already well aware of those UG development complications and risks in a very early technical report by third party consultants for the DFS before CB acquired it

3/ the lack of desire in investing in the infrastructure which was all provided by MMP in a plant that MMP had spent about 10m usd on. Agreeing 23% of net profit was the was the cheapest vehicle to see a maximum return for not much investment and then sold when half of the open pitable ores had already been mined.

4/ back in ‘21AGM Colin and the BOD were at pains to say they “did not want any dilution and that African projects being on course to see good income going forward.” They were not referring to ‘just’ Manica

So with that knowledge it would make someone look very out of touch with the company and totally misaligned with their investment here for anyone still clinging onto the idea they should have kept Manica and reinvested to have a controlling interest toward destiny. As they sure as hell were never going to proceed without.

So, maybe try specific type of opportunities to return shareholder value, but also consider that as far back is in the ‘21 AGM Colin was saying they were targeting small financially stressed projects, where minimum expenditure was required to get them up and running, ready for production. That approach has not wavered yet.

What decisions would you have made on strategy and how would you determine that those decisions would be any better Andrew?

Or if anyone knows or has any better ideas.

The only time a second rig would be bought in would theoretically be an RC rig, from a new permitted pad to reach the proposed ore body at its depth, the hole would be collared and the Diamond core rig would carry on down to final depth. DD is far more costly than RC drilling. But even with this ‘potentially’ more economic approach it is doubtful any previously untested areas would be permitted for drilling if there are already collared holes across the targeted area to have to pre drill down to depth with a different orientation that drill permitting would be far easy to obtain.

They would never bring in a second DD rig in a reconnaissance round of drilling. As a junior, it is highly improbable that a second DD rig would be brought in for any later resource definition and infill drilling even

Agree with you JDAU, Chilibwe could turn out to be a smart acquisition, furthermore, dumped ‘oxide’ material estimated to be around one per cent copper valued at US$1.15 per tonne, for a total investment of US$300,000 at purchase, is stated in the report as being is ‘an attractive investment for the company’

Seeing copper on its widely forecasted rise now will be value accretive to that investment already. With that comment maybe giving some hint toward when they will look to act on it.

Can see further material being purchased after ‘positive’ amenability results before long.

Daffy- “ps This is the answer I will be giving to the following question that I will get at dinner tonight:-

"Where has all the Christmas money gone Daffy?"

Would personally advise against using your Xmas savings to invest, but that is a different matter to the more delicate one surrounding your partner.

Some advice for free Daffy, if they do start to question using your savings and wether there is an alternative,

Julie 38 from Newcastle looks alright 👍

Jackbal what have CL got to do with Ascot?

Hi Ben, Colin has in the very current assets a new major discovery that is solely down to his leadership and vision. With further resource development it could well go on to be a starter mine in itself considering grade and increased gold credits.

Already, I think some of the assets will have to wait on the books until they can be advanced. There is enough money to scope out the best with potential returns and see small scale mining to get established to see any returns re invested to supplement current income until such times as that stops.More major developments on that with priority could see a number of ways capital is sought thereafter. Manica cash will not likely stretch to more major developments Could it still fail? Yes of course but the rewards in the junior sector are rarely equaled, that’s why we are all here.

I think most are seriously not taking much into account of the effects of the global economic climate has had on the sector and has mothballed most projects across the junior sector. It didn’t help shareholders to a degree that BR Hole number 1 and PR drive coincided with the Covid rise in the sector fuelling sentiment that saw the market cap pushed up to a ridiculous spike that we have all had to suffer with and live with our actions.

Will have to wait and see how the company is positioned financially at the end of FY27.

hi andrew my post was ‘not’ about how ‘confident’ i am on delivering but more about how happy i am with my stratergy to remain invested in what is now, i think to be a safer, longer term bet in relative terms in this risky as **** sector.

for me, once the 23% deal of income from manica started, from that point it was always going to be about an income stream for me, that provided a certain support level throughout this down turn, which has proved to be non dilutive since, with also having a business model for growth and a pathway to deliver it, compared to the other companies in the group, and wider generally too that cannot boast that.

i will judge the company on the degree of success or failure when the time comes more in line with a realistic timeframe based on overall company stratergy, my very own evaluation as of this point in time today, and based on the current value of my capital, not its book value. not before then and not based on sentiment, past disappointment or from projects that have been withdrawn with all costs having to be impaired. 5hit ‘appens.

it’s far too early to judge current assets.

which project has gone sour abso?

Abso..lutely!

I believe there will be huge supply deficits in critical minerals through various reasons and not just the demand possibilities from battery storage metals and EVs. but from global electrification generally. I think if anyone ‘doesn’t’ believe in the copper story and are not looking toward M&A activity to see those big returns then I can get while investors are not as happy as me with my investment.

What Colin is able to do with the Moz mine money that is incoming until ‘28 is to significantly reduce the need to dilute with heavily discounted fund raises while market capitalisations for juniors are rock bottom whilst progressing projects to get a real head start on them. Puts Xtract in an enviable position to its peers to acquire and ‘scope’ quality exploration and near development projects in highly prospective regions within good jurisdictions with supportive governments. Once scoped through careful evaluation and allocation of funds, the most prospective projects can be prioritised toward montisation with further cash injection through various options. The idea also, to bring online small scale mining operations that could ‘at least’ provide ongoing development funds to grow these operations to later provide sustainable income from larger scale to further decrease the need for capital raises is the ideal model to grow the company.

I prefer having the safety net the income is bringing over the other companies in the CB stable, the diversification and the low up front capital cost to start bringing in additional income to re-invest in growth.

A safer bet all in all, in theory for my money. Diversification is crucial to mitigate against failure risks to certainly not at this stage just concentrate on just one project, “that” would be reckless! Plus we have BR and with its gold in certain pit optimisation scenarios, has seen up to half a billion dollars increase in value alone from elavated gold price since the ’22 study, that goes straight to the bottom line.

….that the next round will be targeting in that same anomoly. (kopje)

It was a recon round Ben, first time these outlying anomalies have been drilled. So hitting mineralisation first time round is a big bonus in itself, a sighter round going in relatively blind, that the Diamond drill core data is essential in itself for mapping. It’s not until the lab results are back, the geos can put all the true data into the resource model, to really start to focus in with the targeting toward both, that near-surface and deeper hypogene mineralisation.