Member Info for howezap

Window dressing is a fair enough description but more likely it will be done to meet the ASX listing requirements as doozer has pointed out.

Trippy the share price is irrelevant upon a consolidation, your capital investment will not be affected and it should then become the all time high market capitalisation to be looking toward breaking.

Hi 3card it’s more about the cost savings of the down stream processing due to the higher head grade and significant reduction in mass that should offset the trade offs that the pre concentration step itself will have and in terms of the recovery losses. It’s not possible to determine viability at this point until more detailed test work is carried out on the different types, looking at those plant and op costs to be able to revise the parameters and finally put them into the financial model. So we won’t know for sure for a little while yet.

It’s not even mining it’s more ‘muck away’ 👍

“Miner? Yes! Simple.”

That’s a cop out Markjp, I feel that as a disciple of the company you are still duty bound to waffle on about ‘yes’, we are a miner, but also a development and exploration company that will eventually be able to self fund its objectives from treasury.

Greatland should now, never knowingly be undersold 😜

Don’t know about you guys, but do find myself getting carried away with telling anyone that will listen about GGP and my new knowledge of mining and my now reasonable but still fairly crude geological understanding of the resource makeup and the mining techniques that will be incorporated to exploit Telfer and Havieron’s precious minerals and why it is a compelling investment case.

Only the other day I was chatting to my neighbours over the garden fence, when Gretta Thunberg was brought up. I thought this was an ideal opportunity to share my other passion with them on my own stance on climate change and how the mining industry as a whole can incorporate modern technologies and implement renewable energy to ultimately save on water useage and fossil fuels to bring their carbon footprints down. I then managed to bring GGP into the conversation, which was more of a lecture if I’m being honest as my neighbours just stood there with a look of bewildered awe on their faces. I had them hooked on every word I was saying about open stoping but before I could get onto the extraction processes, they all of a sudden both turned on their heels without saying anything and skipped off when their mum called them in for their tea.

Bit rude I thought!

Really encouraging RNS. Sounding like the company are positive that the results will show CPF to be viable and hopefully include it in the flowsheet design. Economic performance will benefit further due to reduced operating costs particularly as primary crushing is not as energy intensive for example, so there will be some more optimisation of the potential knock on economic effects from the plant and operating costs that can be trimmed down.

A welcome update👍

“Always a good sign.”

For sure, could not have asked for a better endorsement at the perfect time to keep up the momentum.

As I put, it does make sense with the close proximity of the licenses and from the knowledge that the geology would share the same architecture as have been told.

I put this in the TG chat, reply to lack of any explanation from company on progress

> I do agree with you James, but I guess with current sentiment any negative news will not be received very well. It is more likely, that as long as and while there is an active presence on the ground drilling etc representing the group, GLR in particular, it is a strategic decision to hold off XTR until they get a better geological understanding through GLR’s drill core data so they can see if there is any obvious correlation with the geophysical data to assist in a better targeting accuracy. Could be advantageous ahead of deploying all crews together Makes a lot of sense. <

> In one of the last interviews with Colin, he said something along the lines of, not knowing who would start drilling first but “thinks it might be Xtract”. This could have implied that whoever deployed first, would be the Guinea pigs in that first reconnaissance round, to feed that initial data to the groups geo team where the drill cores magnetic susceptibility data is used to help interpret the modelling of the magnetic data from the EM surveys.

Sometimes it’s not what Colin says but why or how he says them. If it can improve Xtr chances of hitting mineralisation when they are deployed then that is going to be worth it.

Again just my guess as to what’s going on but of course could be wrong. <

Anyone here considered this?

Don’t mind being wrong on drilling start Andrew if is the case. There’s usually a curve ball with all things Colin & Co. Will find out for sure soon enough.

The ten point investment case should be pinned up top as a sticky if only LSE had that facility. Could easily expand on the investment case by including the important fact that the Government of Greenland has already approved the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Social Impact Assessment (SIA) for the Nalunaq project in June 2024, while the Impact Benefit Agreement will also be agreed by the end of 2024. ESG compliance can turn up some huge stumbling blocks that are well out the way now that many investors in a development project do not even realise the significance of the de risking involved. That in a changing world where social and environmental tolerances of mining are continually decreasing making it more and more difficult in obtaining permissions.

AMRQ does has the three main characteristics that any sound investments should have. Archer covers them in the ten points, an exceptional asset, a high quality management team, and serious finance of which the July refinancing for US$35 million in three Revolving Credit Facilities is significant on two fronts; it gives AMRQ all the cash it needs to get into production comfortably, but is also a strong signal of confidence from a major creditor, making AMRQ very investable being low risk but also with a substantial upside potential from those super high head grades that will be feeding its new plant.

Don’t think anything has changed that makes it depressing, priority is to maximise the return whether that be selling before the next big push is needed financially or through equity funding to complete a PFS. Have a couple of years to complete the work they are already into and possibly the 3rd drill prog that has been in planning before any firm decisions need to be made.

It could still be sold at any point up to then, but they won’t stop doing what they are doing to just put it up for sale, as they still need to complete the optimisation that should drive down costs, improve free cash flow margin and increase NPV.

Don’t actually think will see a ‘next’ conceptual study, have already seen a scoping level and pit optimisation study. Going by what was said I would hazard a guess that the hope is to go straight into pre feasibility next when they can produce a set of improved on economic mining scenarios. Not saying the company can fund the pfs on its own, but the decision will need to be made to be able to then attract further investment wether by means of selling on, or continue through equity funding or its JV’d.

Plus, there is potentially more high grade tonnage that can be added to the early mine plan to the NW ‘if required’ to get the economics where they need to be.

“Bush Ranger could be viable at $10,000usd per ton and above we are told.”

Don’t forget the present studies are intended to increase the economic viability of the lower grade with the main objective of re-assessing that breakeven price.

Another day another penny!

Archer has done, what he calls s short and snappy piece on AMRQ hoping will raise further attention and help sustain the decent momentum have seen recently.

https://open.substack.com/pub/thatstocksguy/p/amaroq-minerals-the-investment-case?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Bamps-

“Wind turbines, solar farm, maybe Hydrogen and battery systems are a forgone conclusion. This is going to be a huge project and will eventually see big cost savings.”

Very much onside with that, would eventually become a really attractive investment, ( beyond the obvious LOM and high economic returns ) Havieron has the opportunity to be transformational.

If it’s relatively small amount of Copper can be mined and extracted using renewable energy, it is possible that at some point we could see tiered global copper pricing in the future where premiums for ‘green’ copper could well be payed to producers that have the lowest carbon footprints.

Sound mad? Due to current changing social and environmental acceptances of how new mines will need to operate. We will inevitably see for example, lower grade mines that are supplied by renewables, trump those in M&A’s with higher grade mines but are off the grid, as majors adhere to their own sustainable mining plans and also along with the responsibilities they have to their investors.

Yep agree CP, AMRQ appears to be progressing under the radar from the herd at present which I kinda like for now as have been confidently adding. No doubt that will soon change.

Much better now, could this timely overhaul signal the company are going to start concentrating on the share price finally?

You could try Bono, no more ridiculous a suggestion than yours lucky 😉

Are you sure it’s not that other companies in the current spotlight on AIM at present are just luring a few people and siphoning their money out of XTR and others into theirs?

There is nothing in the interims that has changed the investment case for the worse to cause any sell off. Healthy cash balance, an update on Silverking and now this time differing from previous, it states that Altrius have ‘reported’ that preliminary results from 2nd round of test work is favourable.

Cannot underestimate the significance these results could have on project economics, particularly after they can finally ‘complete’ Capital and Op cost optimisation that has not even been started yet.

Currently the company are at the mercy of third party contractors and consultants own timescales. We have seen it before and will see it again. They’ll act when ready.