Member Info for howezap

And that’s your response gixxer? Can you back that up with any kind of rationale or proof to dispute anything I have stated. I get you are particularly bitter, so no worries if you don’t want to respond.

A lot of whatever was said back then is still inconclusive to be fair. Not disputing your quotes as I know you had recorded what was actually said in AGM and in private after. Targets were certainly over egged with specific targets not hit. But BR lives to fight another day with successful resource and plant optimisation.

“The AA clause would be triggered”

No guarantees whatsoever BR would have been sold at that time if it had. The AA clause is now considered a moot point.

“That there was 2mt @BR “

Phases 1and 2 fell short but there is likely to be ‘far’ in excess of 2mt at BR.

“That BR would be a mine”

BR has all the hallmarks of going on to making it as a mine if they can get it to the point where they can make a decision to take it to pre feasibility.

“That BR would have a 100yr mine life”

Depending on above, BR could very well see a considerable mine life due to proximal multi porphyry at or near surface and underground.

“That BR was a world class, tier-1, asset.”

No it was not likely to be tier 1 from those intercepts, but is it still going to be desirable?

“That BR would be sold 'not the death of 1k lashes”

Still not sure what that actually means but may or may not need a few more lashes to get it over the line.

“That BR was worth >10p a share”

The final updated economic model whenever that happens will determine a better project valuation.

10p a share would not be unrealistic.

“it goes without doubt that we have a world class porphyry on our hands"

It is significant in scale, multi proximal porphyry’s, simple metallurgy, small plant footprint for favourable ESG in a top mining jurisdiction with an actively supportive government of mining. In the changing climate the bottom line is not the ‘only’ consideration. Projects that score heavily in their ESG will trump projects that may have higher NPV’s but could have far higher carbon footprints for one, in environmentally sensitive regions or half way up a mountain.

“its certainly world class"

“We've got a world class situation"

As above.

“Manica monthly income would bring in way more than it ever did”

100% would still had been sold as the mine was getting deeper, MMP costs were getting deeper that required much more capital, this was even before the phase two sulphide plant decision. It was an easy decision and to invest in copper and antimony projects.

Hi Wheaton you could always upload images to something like Google drive and post link to view here.

If you wanted to share images to display cleanly from link just make sure the file is uploaded to Drive, sharing is set to Anyone with the link and permission is Viewer

Worth a try as LSE doesn’t allow certain links, they did used to.

Listening to the podcast it sounds like the longest lead time is the pre stripping to deliverable ore. I posted on TG but worth bringing up here for others views. Colin made a really interesting comment that they have put in place a ‘bigger’ primary crusher with ball mill and additional ball mill to to put in.

What we know is that the addition of another ball mill was said in an earlier RNS that it will ‘’facilitate de-bottlenecking’ of the concentrator, the most cost intensive step in any flowsheet design, downstream of the primary crusher. This is always the most common point where flow rate is most restrictive as depends on rock hardness to be ground down, so smallest concentrator possible is used for to be utmost efficient.

But why would they change up for a bigger crusher from the one designed?

Colin had said that within one year they will be looking to double throughput of 500tpd to up to over 1000tpd. So could this be a design precursor to that, with just additional bank of flatation cells to add when time comes that won’t be as disruptive, instead of shutting down the plant for weeks to install the bigger jaw crusher and additional ball mill?

Sounds like good engineering practice while waiting for the sulphides to be delivered to ROM. Also could mean they anticipate or have better option of ramping up throughput earlier than anticipated.

Sensible or not so sensible thoughts anyone?

I think to put our own guess above and beyond the guidance timeframe based on Bird past performance is unreliable. Oval are the mining contractor and owner holder of the mining license at SK and majority controlling partner, so Colin’s guidance is Ovals guidance. ‘Tony’ Lukonde Makungu who is president of Oval Mining and also an executive director and shareholder of Cooperlemon must be p155ing himself.

They do have a say in design and development but toward final delivery of first concentrate, maybe not so as they have bought into ‘their’ plant.

Colin gets stick for something he has no real control over but I guess fair game for many for putting himself in the firing line. But let’s just put it down to being an African ventures where things do tend to move at a more glacial pace.

That’s complete tosh lucky, we all know the only way you can really tell if news is about to land is If a crow lands in your garden facing east on a perfectly dry sunny day and caws three times, meaning the bankers have blessed the mine and financing has been signed off and news is about to break in a couple of hours definitely maybe.

Anyone kind enough to sum up in 3 words the last few days posts as too many to trawl back through. What have we learned?

I only got as far as Billy has 9million shares. 👏 Have you increased as thought you said you held 6million previous?

All here for same reason.

Https://open.substack.com/pub/thatstocksguy/p/kendrick-resources-602?r=4j2ztm&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

Is my assumption the concentrate will be sold domestically to local smelter rather than exported, same as XTr Silverking concentrates, so an issue of an export permit may not be required.

In the terms of the 100% off take agreement, there is both the concentrate offtake and a structured prepayment facility with a globally recognised commodities trader who would be responsible I would have thought.

Great, simple thread idea Wheaton, keep latest info updated. Copy, paste, add or edit as mine and resource development progresses to keep bumping it up for easy reference. 👍

Shame LSE doesn’t allow sticky threads to pin to top for quick reference.

“CB mentioned the potential for major institutional backing at this stage.”

He did say that which at this stage would most likely come in the form of a private placement with warrants attached. So take into consideration to stump up a big cash injection, institutional investors don’t tend to pay premium prices! Put it that way.

CB/Martyn also said the previous podcast they want to systematically increase the resource on their own while they can. (Words to that effect) so a farm in or JV for project level funding at this stage doesn’t sound likely and not usually done off the back of an in house estimate this early into exploration anyway.

Although any placement has a dilutive effect on the current share base it is far better and more value accretive ‘in the long run’ to retain as much ownership for as long as viable, than giving away provably more than half of your projects future NPV to a partner too early that would essentially want a controlling interest. We know how Colin feels about being a minority partner.

CB will be happy if they raise above the last placing price. Was implied in last podcast. Chances are it will drop nearer to the 20 or 50 DMA and be discounted to incentivise to guarantee full subscription. Whether the offer has gone out to those registered to participate or not, only those will know and price determined by what price ‘they’ are comfortable with.

Stick my neck out and say a realistic 4-5p pulling one off higher will be a massive vote of confidence

Got nothing to do with whether I believe it or not, those are the core facts based on last official update, what needs to happen following traditional lines and some basic assumptions so let’s get real.

There is still the necessity to put an increase in expenditure on them each year to stick to NSW Gov obligations for tenements so nothing actually gets parked up per-sae. The test work may not have necessarily all been completed in one hit, Cb said they would only spend another 80k or so on ore sorting, these funds could have been split and allocated over two seasons with still the matter off waiting for new normal high metal prices, to demonstrate real production scenarios above 11k copper based on updated OpEx and CapEx costs in the final study.

They still have the high grade portion at racecourse that would need the mass reducing by pre concentrating if a smaller plant is to be viable as mining rates would still essentially need to be around 20mtpa with much lower processing rates down to 1-3mtpa in line with the lower grades that are amenable to CPF Novacel tech sorting already.

Not my opinion is an educated assumption.

Hi marktrader, the website will give you any tonnages you’re asking for bushranger. The 2mt target is now a moot point. Far more important is whether a starter mine at Racecourse can be economically mined. The project is currently undergoing optimisation to improve the economics of a standalone operation from its Racecourse deposit alone.

The project is approaching a really important juncture , wether the economics of its current open pit mining study, once updated with any latest test work results of ongoing modern ore sorting tech and the effects of increased values of sustainable higher metal prices, the final study will justify wether a decision is made to take the project onto pre feasibility. This decision then opens up various options to monetise the project with an asset sale being the most desired, equity funding to go it alone or a JV partner to put up the 15-20mil quid or more, to take it onto PFS.

Is not clear if the shallower oxides they are now down to will be sold as run of mine material or stockpiled for later distribution to a nearby plant that will accept them. Regards to the statement made in the new JV RNS -

‘The operation is within three months of production commencement and thereafter ramp up.’

Could be construed as the sulphide plant receiving first ore when it clearly states the ‘operation is within three months….’ Which could clearly be the case where the wording is concerned that is in dispute.

As always it’s not what is stated but how it could be interpreted wrong.

I vouch for News in that the consistency and unique style of their posts has not changed over the last 7 or 8 years have known them. ‘Undoubtedly’ very knowledgeable of the industry having engaged in ‘chat’ conversation with them many years ago. Will reference their analysis and information shared at source, so can be easily verified. Their sign off, may seem usual to some but they do it for easy and quick reference if the need to refer back to any particular post if disputed for example or to extract information. Nothing but the correlation of facts and the relaying of media coverage! One could argue done in a way to suit their own agenda, but no different than every single member that posts on a public forum. I’m guessing News has a background as an analyst?

Hi 8ead, appreciate your view. Mine is simply based on the very obvious future funding requirements over at KEN. With my view being that any other significant news (in the short term) will be directly competing for new money that KEN will need if they are to start their mission to systematically increase confidence in their REE project, with the strongest market cap and best chance to begin to push it as far up the value curve as possible with their current ownership. ( What Martyn specifically said and with implication)

On CB’s ability to run his group of companies and the direct relationship that has to all his shareholders, I offer just one word, diversification.

He has gained a really strong suit of diversified assets, multi minerals, multi jurisdictional, at different stages of project evolution, in different sizes or scale of project potential, Different ownership strategies through established partnerships. All housed in a complex, but normal network of subsidiary companies within the various mother companies in the group. They all have two things in common, are all going into a critical metals supercycle that will last for a generation and Colin Bird.

But we pick and choose our favourites and then may not like how Colin operates at times, particularly with putting his hands in the cookie jar, he is in it for financial gain as are we. Difference is it sometimes makes you feel as though we are having to fight for the scraps left under the table, made worse by most LTH sitting on paper losses due to the global economic 5hitstorm that all started from the fallout from Covid.

But we believe in Colin otherwise we wouldn’t be here. Some will be big winners, H&G ‘IS’ one of them m, just the first of many over the next 5 years say, so wouldn’t the sensible thing to do is spread money out across the whole group?

“WSBN's modelling MMT showed that the next EXTENSION could have more of the readings, so not surprised they took more licences”

Hi News always a pleasure to read your commentary. That also works the other way too doesn’t it?

Is also a good indicator by fact of picking up further licenses which shows they have a broader exploration strategy and also beyond just Red Setter.

The way it generally works is that they would pay rent on these tenements where there is a requirement to essentially, put an increase of expenditure on them each year. But as they don't want to be paying rent on something you're not using, early field programs, done across multiple tenements to confirm the presence of mineralized zones which then establishes the framework for district-scale exploration.

Shows a real intent.

I don’t believe the overdue due news here as well as XTr is anything company specific. More influenced by the ongoing funding requirements for Kendrick to achieve best outcome in terms of dilution to current share base. Martyn had said KEN were currently funded up to a in house estimate of which now has been released so would expect a fundraise to jump on the initiative to progress their REE asset anytime soon. Some attention can then return to other companies without influence to their funding situation.

Just my theory, what say?

The harsh reality of utilising PR the way they did with the hype, was to pull off the raise for working capital for this years extensive exploration programme. I won’t say that all ceos do it, but in the junior explorers it is more common practice than what should be allowed and the origin of where drilling is referred to as the rotary lie detector. They simply wouldn’t get away with this behaviour listing on the ASX as the OZ are a true mining nation and more clued up than your average uk investor.

But without driving up the market cap they way the it did, the raise would have diluted its longer term stakeholders considerably more. By doing so, a company in their situation with a big project area to test will now be able to push the project so much further up the value curve, with a potentially better outcome for all of its investors in the long run.

Expenditure v Asset value.

But this has screwed the late comers that bought in higher. One would hope as part of their investing strategy they were able to bring averages down some and keep their little slice of ownership of the company in line with their original purchase . So good luck to those, who don’t deserve seeing their capital with substantial paper losses, but of any consolation you are not alone and currently that is all they are, paper losses which could change with one drill hole.