Member Info for howezap

Occsionally happens where an agreement is made party to party to transfer shares from one to other. Likely then that one of those transactions relates to the sell, the other to the buy. Executed both sides of the deal at exactly the same price, no margin, no market maker.

‘Generally’, all trades are matched trades and are reported as either a buy or sell depending on what side of the mid price they were executed which can add to confusion. Mid price trades usually reported as unknown.

Can’t spend what not received yet Boudica

“SD isn't going to pee on the aussies chips

mates rates, friendly favours and all that”

I know many see SD as the messiah but even he can’t manipulate the share price …can he? 🤔

Agree NtM something brewing, or just bit of house keeping?

Plenty of reasons to appoint a joint broker though from better access to a wider market to raise money, providing wider knowledge and insight into market trends and investor sentiment which can help with decisions and strategy.

Also, brokers might have existing relationships with other companies, financial institutions, or stakeholders in the mining sector. Is a way in to potential partnerships, joint ventures, or other opportunities that could benefit the company. You scratch my back etc. What you planning Colin?

Old Col has FIVE racehorses ?

Actually got his own Racecourse!

On expected quarterly revenues. The team are continually going through high level plant and operating cost optimisations. Particular improvements to metallurgic recovery protocols that will see an approximate A$100m extra in revenue per annum, so should see roughly a 10%minimum increase in estimated quarterly figures from comparative preliminary results from the restart.

What the deeper implications are of only having a resource without reserves if I can elaborate on what Bamps has rightly stated regarding Minyari.

The JORC resource statements on their own just quantify a resource and give the market an indication of scale of project. A JORC is not a validation of any kind toward value of a resource. The market, and more importantly, a potential buyer cannot ‘confidently’ determine viability and true value from the economic assumptions at anything below Pre Feasibility study level.

So upgrading the resource to be able to then convert into ore reserves needs to happen first as a requirement for a PFS

Commonly the 3 main reasons you would do PFS is firstly, as a basis to commit to a large programme or development, secondly to provide a justification for proceeding to a final feasibility study, or, in the case of Antipa, to attract a buyer, JV or get equity funding to go it alone.

Think we put that one sufficiently to bed for another week or two 😆

When Greatland do decide to go on an M&A offensive, they will certainly not likely to be throwing money at exploration plays that are still only at scoping study level. There is not any necessity to take on the risk burden themselves of proving up a resource like Minyari that needs a lot of work yet to prove viability.

Far better for Greatland to spend more and buy success in more advanced already proven viable projects that have largely been de risked, and ultimately better for those project owners to at least get essentially what is their primary asset, (normally the one that they are pinning all their hopes on), to get it to Pre Feasibity and into DFS. They will then have the ability to attract provisional funding for the capital expenditure and initial working capital requirements of the project, crucial for getting top dollar and returning their own shareholders greater value.

Projects with a funding solution in place are inherently worth more than ones without.

So it works for both parties, one acquires a de risked asset although at a higher premium and the other has pushed their project much further up the value curve. Antipa or anyone else!

Is not in Greatland’s interest to consider a merger with Antipa yet and not inline with their growth strategy they have laid out anyway.

Several major Australian gold miners are diversifying into copper, reflecting a strategic shift in response to the growing demand for copper.

Harmony Gold has made a significant move by acquiring MAC Copper Limited, which owns the CSA Copper Mine in New South Wales. This acquisition, valued at approximately $1.03 billion, positions Harmony as a key player in the copper market and aligns with Harmony's strategy to diversify its portfolio and improve cash flow generation.

BHP is also exploring copper opportunities, particularly with its IOCG Oak Dam deposit, which is part of the Olympic Dam region. Indicating BHP's commitment to expanding its copper assets alongside its gold operations.

MACH Metals has acquired the Hillside project, which contains substantial copper and gold resources. This acquisition is part of their strategy to diversify their asset portfolio and capitalize on the increasing demand for copper.

Coda Minerals is advancing its Elizabeth Creek project, which has shown promising economic viability with a projected annual copper production of 25,400 tonnes. This project is located in the Olympic Dam province, further emphasizing the region's potential for copper mining.

Cyprium Metals is redeveloping the Nifty copper project and has formed a strategic alliance with Macmahon Holdings to enhance its operational capacity. This move indicates a focus on copper production alongside their existing gold operations.

Havilah Resources is developing the Kalkaroo project, which is notable for its large copper and gold resources. This project positions Havilah among Australia's significant undeveloped copper deposits.

These companies are all responding to the anticipated surge in copper demand.

So the diversification into copper not only helps mitigate risks associated with gold price fluctuations but also positions Greatland to leverage their current, and to develop new infrastructure to capitalise on the growing market for copper in the coming years.

Thanks for sharing the SEG research paper TT and worth a note to others that the SEG is a leading global nonprofit organisation that is totally impartial and dedicated to advancing the understanding, development, and stewardship of Earth's resources through geoscience.

No fluff, bias or agenda, just fact

Hi Touristvisitor, you are guessing right it is good news for GGP with “our byproduct from gold digging.”

I posted a little something on ggpchat about the contribution copper could play.

Although gold in the Paterson will always be the ‘dominant’ focus and main revenue generator, Copper however is expected to provide ‘substantial’ opportunities for growth and development in the coming years, so could see it becoming less supplementary, if the company increases its diversification into critical minerals.

The change in company name to Greatland Resources to better reflect the shift toward now being a multi mineral explorer, development company and producer, is an obvious strategic move that woukd rightly now see a dual focus of the company equally toward copper and gold that has come at a perfect time in Greatland’s evolution with the forecasted supply and demand deficit that will see copper increase in value and be on a bull run that could last for decades, even generational.

Could even go as far as to say with copper being as critical and central to decarbonising toward net zero and providing the infrastructure to supply electricity and renewable energy solutions for up to the billion people on the planet that do not have access to it, could be seen as copper going through the equivalent of the Industrial revolution.

So yeah pretty good for GGP

There is only a CGT liability once funds are transferred ‘out’ of the broker account into your current acc linked to it.

That is if both accounts are with the same broker 👍

Newbe10. Call your broker over the phone, they will execute both trades and get you a better margin on price

Hi Adz everyone has their own expectations upon ASX listing, currently there are still some unknowns to be able to confidently translate the potential into the share price yet. The Oz investors are no different, it is just going to depend on how risk averse they are.

As Shaun has already stated, they will want to see a few quarters figures before buying in. This will coincide there abouts with the release of the DFS which certain larger institutions will want to evaluate first as it gives detailed costs, rates, revenues and expected returns on investment which will be of importance. Typically they would want to see a DFS to assess these potential returns and risks before committing funds for investment. These will be the basic catalysts for a rerate.

There will be plenty of volatility on joining but I think shareholders should be just tempering their expectations a bit on any sustained and immediate significant rerate.

Here’s my alternative view on it , the company have only just moved out of the bottom tier of junior explorers that make up 80-90%+ of all companies in the resource sector that ‘rely’ on raising capital from shareholders via allocation of new shares.

Just think about that and the giant leap the company has made, not obout how far back the corporate manoeuvring started leading to acquisition, but in how progressively the company is establishing itself just in the 6 months since taking over.

And the irony is, to join the premiere league, Greatland need to demonstrate they can raise capital from the market!

Essentially just look at it as a nostalgic trip down memory lane, get it done and dusted and we can move on to the more important matters.

There is a new ranking system recently established in the mining sector that helps to assess and rank the performance of companies based on various criteria such as production, revenue, market capitalization, and sustainability. Is an alternative to some of the main lists such as

Fortune Global 500; This annual ranking lists the 500 largest companies in the world by revenue, including major mining companies.

The Mining Top 50: This list, published by various industry publications, ranks the top mining companies based on market capitalization and production output.

To just name a couple, these lists provide insights into the financial health, operational efficiency, and sustainability practices of mining companies, helping investors and stakeholders make informed decisions, but can be a little confusing for the average investor.

The latest metric apparently now being used to gauge the performance of a company, is based how long the waiting lists are for shareholders to attend their presentations!

Brilliant 👏well done team Bamps et al must try to attend one nearer south.

Bottom line, success with Greatland now going forward will not just be reliant on whether or not there will be enough ore to sustainably feed the plant.

There is enough resource and proximal resource understanding to have the confidence in ability to continually bring those into the mine plan over time. I certainly don’t think it is now, or was ‘ever’ going to be about whether or not there was enough ore bearing rock that can be exploited, still in and around Telfer. And that’s discounting Havieron.

Now it has been demonstrated they can bridge the ore gap up to Hav first production, I cannot foresee any other major gaps in ore to supplement Hav for many years thanks to Bamps’s analysis particularly.

It is more now, about how the business operates from corporate level decision making right down to feet on the ground that determines success and growth.

Top three criteria for ‘any’ mining investment.

It’s management first, management second; and management third. And then it goes from there. This is particularly the view of Oz investors.

Good management can take a mediocre asset and make it work. Bad management can’t generally make a bad asset work. And bad management can even screw up a good asset.

Having a good and experienced management with a good asset on the other hand is what will drive success. Furthermore, with that combination of that resource abundance, the economic significance and regulatory stability in Australia, makes Greatland’s business case a huge focal point already for Oz investors to see a decent uptrend in the market cap.

What always gets overlooked in all the gold value and income debates, is the meaningfull contribution that copper is going to play, it really isn’t just a marginal credit, it will make up around 20% from Greatland revenues.

Copper is at the very heart of the global transition to decarbonise, but also central in the upgrading of some countries p155 poor existing power networks, or providing new grid infrastructure to supply electricity for up to 1 billion people on the planet that currently do not have any access to it. With renewable energy to balance networks and installations to provide power to those totally off grid, being copper reliant too.

Compounded by the limited growth and investment over the past two decades toward new discoveries and in copper mining, to supply that demand, it is anticipated there will already be a deficit by 2026, copper is only going one way, and that is up too.

Hi Daz thank you for sharing the JV link to Hav.

There is a point to be made there to support your rationale regarding the funding and loan to GGP ‘before’ PFS for Havieron. But Newmonts staged farm in was toward and to provide the PFS and so on. No way Greatland could have done it on their own. We had to give away a lot to achieve that then. Antipa are better positioned to advance Minyari to de- risk it on their own, but would choose to monetise it to share the risk burden. GGP do not need to take on those risks.

We can though, certainly agree on that all deposits/ resources/ projects are uniquely different, and one model for one does not mean it will be, or even can be applied to another.