Member Info for howezap

No they won’t ignore GGP but one of the 3 objectives for listing, are to provide the group with access to additional capital to support long-term growth. Some of which is mandated exclusively for ASX listed investments.

This is laid out in the September admission document.

Lower case happens to me sometimes if compile in notes on iPad then copy paste. Don’t do it on phone. I’m an IT numpty tho just saying! 😉

“This old Newcrest licence sandwiched between Camp Dome , Paterson 8 and Chicken Shack comes up for renewal on 5th January.

That makes 8 licences now needing extensions” - Bamps

Heard an interesting quote from a Head of Corporate Development of another miner that they are essentially now having to do exploration to start ‘eliminating’ some of their prospects to trim their projects down to around 4 or 5 that have the greatest development potential. GGP are in a very similar enviable position with an extensive land package. Without extensions for any of these licences that have limited exploration, they clearly will never know where the next ‘best’ viable satellite mine or other will come from. GGP do have a larger exploration budget though but I guess the principle is always going to be the same outcome?

Nuts to think Telfer probably started with just a soil sample and has now produced over 15m oz of gold.

Archer was pressed for his end of ‘25 share price predictions over on his TG group. For AMRQ gave a reluctant guess of £1.40 on a proviso that the company start to pay a dividend and not throw all profits into exploration.

Interesting quote

With a mc of £4.2m and income of £12m spread over period up to mar’27 yea crikey.

Hi Bamps I think a lot of the future capital that the company is wanting to attract for its longer term growth could come from ASX, some will only be exclusive for ASX listed investments so the dual listing increases the groups exposure to those additional pots of cash. I think that’s the piece of the jigsaw not being considered here.

Also, Increasing II’s will also increase interest in the stock which increases liquidity.

Don’t ever ‘not’ post something just because you think an opinion may be wrong.

Https://thatstocksguy.substack.com/p/small-cap-mining-2025?publication_id=1504413&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email-share&triggerShare=true&r=4j2ztm

Happy new year to all.

Heres some thoughts on the new year. 2025 is going to see a significant milestones reached with Havieron DFS and will finally lay down the real foundation of the start of what could well be one of the next big growth stories.

As you all probably know already the Oz are a true mining nation so to dual list on ASX is a no brainer to give access to its knowledgeable capital market and their II's. Will extend trading for longer as trading hours overlap and is less volatile than AIM so could help SP stability across listings particularly with the share consolidation.

ASX listing should actually be considered a major step, maybe not a milestone as they are generally only considered for completing certain feasibility studies or reaching major development objectives.

But listing there is going to be significant and pivotal to sustaining healthy growth at corporate level. Once it establishes a proven track record which starts with improving upon the Greatland Base Case with the resulting Havieron DFS, its careful ongoing cash management of bringing first ore through to full production and continues with being able to keep its costs down through ramp up, that incidentally listing on ASX in the first place and relocating all corporate matters there will have do so to a degree due to the current additional expense and difficulties associated with owning Telfer and running it from UK.

ASX will then provide access to additional deep pools of capital to support longer-term growth where it could start to pursue regional as well as district M&A activities.

The significance of dual listing is not to be underestimated in the long term outlook and could also have big impact on share price in the short term too alongside the updated resource and ore reserve statements due in '25 also.

Should be a very good and exciting year for the company……it’s happening!

Happy New Year to all.

There is no conversation more boring than the one where everybody agrees CP

Many simply get too sentimental. You don’t! 👍

Its for a different licence, 39195-HQ-LML. Xtr collaboration agreement is on large scale exploration licence 22118-HQ-LEL

Cant see greatland would take them over without at least Minyari having a Pre Feasibility study. Might get in cheap enough before then but why would they want to take on the full risk burden so early when it’s in Antipa’s own interests to push their projects further up the value curve.

With GGP new long term stratergy, the growth is built on three horizons

= continued advancement of Havieron through to production;

= exploration to identify new precious and base metals deposits with a particular focus in the Paterson; and

= disciplined assessment and, where compelling, pursuit of new investment and acquisition opportunities in the resources sector.

At this moment in time it’s ridiculous to consider greatland will go on an M&A offensive. They only just started their journey toward first production, will be a few years at least and then will want to see a proof of viability for 'any' big aquisition. Majors buy success they dont spend out on just potential at Scoping study level where Minyari is at. It means diddly squat, just potential.

Company clearly has big aspirations in its 3rd horizon to go national/global if to follow in footsteps of Northern Star. Will not achieve its goals by taking huge risks hoping that at least one of its prospective aquisitions is viable.

Premier league now

Agree bamps the economic projections are one thing but tighter money management and rising gold price will increase free cash flow margin.

Was considering the 15 month mine plan could become quite moot for management quite quickly. All projections are based on what are always conservative third party consultancy estimates of resource and ore reserves. Whereas in reality the company would probably have a greater projection based on their own internal estimates that they cannot legally report against. The mine plan economics will be extremely robust for sure. Beyond that, ore will just keep coming as MRE and reserve updates will again be compiled through their third party consultants and potentially well below internal estimates.

Would really love to see the resource model representation overlaying the JORC resource model, that will also contain the additional material that will not be in the JORC due H1'25 Drill data spacing would be quite tight across the bulk of the resource, so is well reported against. But it is around the extremities and where a lot of areas are still open on strike in whatever direction where the bulk of the tonnages in the resource model would differ from the JORC.

The updated MRE is going to be significant anyway if all of Bamps earlier projections all go into it. With a more superior economic performance and NPV to follow that should include lower AISC in the forthcoming study to support DFS for Havieron late ‘25

Could have at least removed my response as well. Now it just looks like I’m confused and rambling away to myself

No change there then!

Lost me after first bulleted point, the disconnect in value of just about every market cap and asset values particularly of the small caps in natural resources that have any half decent, advanced projects in good jurisdictions are widespread now across market.

Then followed by all the usual fovourite gumph phrases in every bullet point like

-more cash coming

-possible, should , likely

-often, may have

And so on down

Reported, Go away

Bamps, So would it correct to assume also that what equally makes Hav so special is that it is also a very strong orebody that lends itself to Sub level open stoping which I read in the PFS that SLOS is “typically applied to strong orebodies that require minimal support and are surrounded by strong country rock, such as the Havieron deposit.”

You mentioned, “Shaun was talking about these stopes being some of the biggest in the industry, that’s not the length but the width and height so this will reduce the overall costs.”

Even the architecture of the surrounding mineralised/barren rock, is as crucial to its low AISC as the ore quality itself thats hosted within, makes Hav unique and special and helps a lot in understanding why there is such a low AISC which is going to return such high margin, high IRR and faster payback in its first mine phase.

Best

Guy

Hi Bamps Thanks for the very thorough response, much appreciated that you took the time. Enjoyed the fine Brandy analogy. Mine is that many years ago when I was young and first met my ‘to be’ father in law he offered me a cognac, being a bit wet behind the ears I asked if he would put some cola in it. Without replying he simply poured the fine cognac back into its decanter and got out the cheap stuff for me. It kinda works too if just to prove your point further that a quality ore should not be mixed. In fact it’s rather rude to even suggest it 🤦

It’s clear there are no two deposits the same let alone defined ore bodies and every mine plan and flowsheet is tailored specifically to every ore body for most economic extraction. What I do know is the quality of Hav is obvious in the low AISC that any layman can understand.

Of course a rising share price is the main reason for being here in the first place, not disputing the fact it has fallen back so much. I’m as unhappy as the next person. But it is clearly not just the CB group of companies that have been affected by the downturn. Im just giving my views on what i have understood in the past and do currently. Everything that i have interpreted or stated has always been taken from information I’ve found already in the public domain i dont have any affiliation with the company in any shape or form. Its been one big guessing game since '21 as to what the company are trying to do. We have also gone through extended periods before of no news. So theres nothing new there that wasn't any different previously.

While there is very little and sustained buying pressure from new investors I’m not sure what shareholders expect other than existing investors jumping from one stock to another on the release of any half decent news which for the exploration miners has noticeably slowed right down.

Ace, the plant, mining and operating optimisation should or could have a profound effect on the mining and extraction rate but will not have any obvious or primary influence on metallurgical recovery rates at processing. The current level of test work is already extensive and those from Telfer are based on ‘actual’ historical data. So we shouldn’t be ‘expecting’ any real improvement from Hav.

Always good to have a recap of what’s to come in the updated MRE. But it’s the size of the district with numerous discoveries already in scale and in mineral diversity and ‘still’ they have only scratched the surface of.

I found the most compelling and thought provoking statement in that from geo James,

“This work will help us to both expand our Nalunaq resource and unlock the high-grade potential of Nanoq.’

The company have reached a massive milestone with Nalunaq now producing revenue, growth from here could be rapid and exponential in relative terms. Give it 5 years and if AMRQ still own it in full or in part it should look a very different company with a very different MC by then.

Thanks, hence why they will rotate processing between the sulphides and oxides once enough stockpiled for a run. Looked a bit more into it and is clearer now.

Just for ref. looking at historical gold / copper recovery rates for Telfer we can expect to see in the region of 75%/77% respectively from UG and 78%/50% from OP and 74%/30% from stock piles

Compared with average Hav gold/copper recovery rates of 86.3% and 84.6% respectively.

Will the DFS level mett test work along with any contributing optimisation have any influence on seeing any improvement?

Am aware those are respectable comparitive recoveries to begin with and not to be viewed as having a negative overtone to that question, just curious.

Have wondered who’s paying you Boudica, you are quite the disrupter, but starting to get desperate now dragging up old news stories from ‘20 as though to pass it off as recent, that the company were unaware of before now.

Why set up a recent alternate account (I believe) and hide behind it to push your agenda?