Member Info for howezap

Blatant cross ramp, if not then you clearly need to brush up on AMRQ.

Do you know how many rigs are currently deployed around Telfer toward the resource upgrades, not grade control? There will be a cut off day that drill core data will be able to be included so can imagine there are multiple crews on site in quite progressive campaigns?

Yes very true Bamps it should be an easy enough gig for Shaun to keep the crazy gang entertained and hopefully convince the market that whatever else goes into the resource can equally go into the mine plan. The base case is essentially pre feasibility study level with all the data inputs taken from the extensive but incomplete Hav JV Feasibilty study, so the base case is very robust so will be no nasty surprises there, so is just down to that additional material that will bridge any gap and continue to supplement Hav. Updating on mine engineering development on Hav to be on schedule will be as important for confidence too the way I see it.

“These days when there is a quiet spell, it is reassuring that behind the scenes Greatland are busy producing gold!”

Like that loggy, but it got me thinking that now the treasury is looking like it’s going to be healthier than it ever has done and, continue to get healthier, the company have likely already gone up one step toward the big boys club.

That being, there will not now be any propensity to rally the AIM ‘capital’ market with the usual stream of successive RNS’s and podcast interviews in saturated PR drives in the hope of raising funds with minimum dilution any more.

No, ggp are not quite at major miner status just yet, but those that are, you would typically be lucky to hear that a major exploration phase has even started let alone completed as example. News will generally be of more corporate significance but less frequent and with little or no project specific updates whatsoever. There is certainly not be the same emotional attachment and sentimentality for shareholders to cling too. Just billions of Australian dollars generating healthy dividends to be excited about…….Boring

Bamps- thanks re the mill, so looking then to be just be part of the whole optimisation phase.

Certainly demonstrates the aggressive approach to streamlining costs if they are looking at existing flowsheet design that has successfully produced 15Moz so far. Anything that has potential to help refine the Feasibility study and be incorporated is going to have to be validated with a schedule with cost estimate. So will likely find out in the DFS if is to see any alterations that are going to coincide with first ore in H2 ‘27.

Bamps/paddy, or anyone else know anything about, have an idea how or have any thoughts in general on the tender process the company is going to conduct as part of the Feasibility study to trim down some of the key cost inputs. By far the most significant would be to adapt or reconfigure key components of the existing two train facility for a ‘single train processing system.’

Referenced in sept admission doc.

Inaccuracy Re post 21.14

Was previously looking into historic operating costs of which are of course made up of both fixed and variable.

Was stuck in OpEx mindset while deciding to use simpler cut off grade instead of NSR and didn’t notice mistake. Check twice post once.

Operating mines is usual to use a net smelter return value for break even

Blimey Irish that’s a bit cynical to just apply that to BR and not every single other exploration project…ever. 😉

Almost forgot to throw in the rising gold price that will certainly help to reduce economic cut off grades and increase free cash flow margins on top.

The pre production capital cost estimate in the Greatland base case of A$803m is the estimated remaining capital expenditure for just up until first Stope ore from Havieron. Thereafter, revenue will then cover all remaining ‘life of mine’ development costs of a further A$483m which that cost will is covered in the AISC for Havieron.

More importantly, what that will then mean is that when Havieron is producing its first ore, any supplementing ore from additional sources will then become higher margin with a lower mining economic cut off rate with the lower AISC reducing the current estimate of the ‘early cash flow generation of Telfer at AISC US$1,454/oz as any supplementing Telfer ore will then only have to carry own ongoing mining costs. As under the base case, it states that Havieron ore currently carries ALL fixed costs. These typically include all employees, processing plant, utilities, fuel servicing and maintenance etc to be clear.

I’m expecting these figures to be re evaluated in the Feasibility study financial model that will reflect all this and after the improved economics from the increased ore reserves and if any optimised bulk ore handling solution is going to be used to increase throughput rate of the Hav ore, are also incorporated into the final mine plan.

This will completely change the resource dynamics of all the further additional Telfer and other sources of ore feed.

It gets better and better!

Hi Cygnus

The dream was to join up RC and Ascot in what would have seen a continuous open pit that would have eventually extended down from the initial mine development at Rc central, into the lower outside open pittable resource after CapEx payback with much lower AISC then finally to access Ascot ore through the link zone in between while still only carrying ongoing mining costs.

I believe this is where the majority of disappointment was from with Colin stating that stripping ratio tolerances to mine those lowest grades in between were just not favourable enough to make it marginally economic. This period of mining could have then been supplemented with the start of underground mining at Rc, in theory.

It was a must for overall project economics to have that understanding. It certainly wasn’t an error judgement call not to continue with building the ascot resource. That can still be done by an eventual acquirer who may then decide to develop Ascot as a starter mine if mineralisation south continues to be better and considering the greater gold credits in Ascot.

After checking, the current group structure is actually very simple, Greatland gold PLC is currently the parent company, but a new Oz parent company will be formed so there will then be the group holding company with 4 existing main subsidiaries that each contain one of the new acquisition assets that are the Telfer and Havieron assets, Telfer exploration assets, Juri sale interest, wiki interests and finally the existing Paterson south subsidiary.

Seen many so complex you couldn’t even begin to explain in words.

This type of group structure is totally normal to gain tax efficiencies mainly, minimise risk etc. Taxation could be a big factor one way or another, but over my head that one.

Hi ace

How much? There will be certain relocation admin costs as well as compliance and legal costs associated with the switch. As well as, then being reduced operating costs and better practicalities and simpler group structure for all its employees that will come from the new Oz parent company.

The relocation will be put to shareholders about the effects of the reorganisation including if any share rights issues will be affected, so may have opportunity to understand the costs better.

They are still likely to hold a registered uk office for AIM I would think

Board meetings??

There could be any number of other reasons why news on BR is taking time, until it updates then we can only speculate, fair one.

All indications have been that XTr will be taking BR to pre feasibility once they can attract equity funding or maybe through JV but less likely imo. Colin also spoke of ‘maybe’ separately listing BR to raise capital, how, when or where have no idea. But as for why, you could draw conclusions from why he would suggest this.

Think there will still be a further round of drilling to the North of RC targeting the additional higher grade to improve economics. So maybe listing it on ASX for this and ongoing? Extra drilling has been highlighted plenty of times so is high enough potential for this to happen at some stage. But maybe not for the foreseeable as they have clearly indicated current work will be low cost.

Not to forget there is still the stonking great anomaly west of Ascot that still hasn’t had any drilling done to confirm is mineralised or not. Which has also been highlighted in news.

Need to open your mind to possibility it ain’t over until the little fat chap sings.

Hi Tymers this newbie has been lurking on the sidelines for past 5 years always followed the board waiting for right time to buy in. I’ll admit if I can find any correlation in any media that stacks up, I will simply put it out there with some rationale behind it to just get some dialogue going sometimes. But I will always be honest and say what I see or know, sometimes will go against the grain and it will pi55 people off but always gracious if I am proved to be wrong. So be warned. 😉

The conclusion to the final economic study has not been seen yet. Once they put in all the revised technical parameters from pre concentration including those from the additional metallurgy test work that will have increased the average recovery rate due to an anomalous reading from one of the 4 original samples sent prior that lowered the average. Results all told should see sub 10k break even making BR viable at current and forecasted copper prices. I do say should!

Just a reminder of what BR is and how important it is to have. 90% of projects are not world class grades. Miners want easy projects, low risk jurisdiction, easy consistent grades, and economical. They want to use a simple method of mining, dig it out the ground without too much over burden, extract it, process i t using methods that have been around for decades and send it cheaply for final processing and smelting. They want whatever they mine to be sustainable, profitable and to last for decades.

By time it would go into production the mines carbon footprint is likely to be very low due to NSW power grid currently balanced with over 50% renewable energy with progressive gov policies to increase this number.

Projects like BR that will be developed to have a low carbon footprint will be favoured over perhaps higher margin projects that are off the grid or in far less favourable jurisdictions.

Times are seriously changing where ESG compliances are concerned.

That’s what makes it a quality asset in a desirable jurisdiction.

There is strengh at group level which will have its advantages.

AIM cull is starting with 92 companies delisting last year. The index has less than 700 now and may continue to fall. A financial analyst has reported that all of them were non profitable. The longer this goes on the better it could turn out for the companies that do survive meaning there should be more risk capital left over between them. What it also would mean is that those other companies that still rely on cash raises and can only raise at huge discounts just to generally pay their ongoing operating expenses will lag behind and be so slow out of the blocks when the market does start to turn bullish again, which it eventually will. XTr particularly with its staged income payments will stand out.

Rick Rule said this would happen and could get a lot worse before market recovers. CB stable should be fine where there are advanced quality assets in favourable jurisdictions held.

The all in sustaining cost in the current 15 month mine development plan is telling us two important things, firstly, the potential profitability against a rising gold price but also the companies confidence that Telfer LOM can be economically sustained which includes the exploration and evaluation costs of which there seems to be a high level of confidence coming from the various sources that bridging the ore gap before Hav comes into play should not be an issue and continue to feed the plant to supplement Hav ore for years ti come.

Incidentally, on AISC the company will already have assumptions made on the associated costs involved with all the upcoming corporate actions and relevant house keeping relating to dual listing and relocating to Oz already incorporated into the 15 month mine development plan so there would not be additional costs incurred from free cash flow.

Don’t listen to our billy, he doesn’t understand the company strategy or why gold mine was even sold. That is funny!