Member Info for howezap

Pointless to put any valuation to BR without a viable study to put to AA, just have to be patient on that one to get an outcome.

Readng between the lines of the agreement for silver king, the intention is to sell it if a resource is found of over 500kt. Under that, it may be developed by both parties as a mining operation.

The second phase buy in, if spend is shared 50/50 then xtr would stay at their 51% stake they have from the phase 1 buy in. Alternatively, if or whoever stumps up the whole USD 1m then that party would increase to 70% for a resource up to 500kt Cu.

Over 500Kt and only ‘if sold’, it reverts back regardless to 50% sale proceeds ‘each’ minus sale costs that CL pick up with some other caveats before being equally split thereafter.

Too early to talk about valuing, but the higher the resource found will see the less risk with less capital spend with greater short to medium term reward with more chance of an asset sale over a development case.

Am funGuy cru is why I can’t be filtered into one of those little green boxes as there’s not mushroom inside.

Thanks for the reply Andrew can recollect that now you mention.

One thing the ‘23 report should be able to state with a better degree of certainty now since the disposal of Manica is that in its assessment of ongoing working capital the company can more confidently do that without having to consider different scenarios based on any anticipated mine development costs or have to consider a different number of production forecasts to determine if further funding is likely in the next 12 months. Which one would think is fairly unlikely as long as MMP are coughing up.

Hi Andrew

2020 was the last year had final results and notice of AGM in early June. Covid pushed AGM far later with recent results being published end of June and AGM in July since.

Have you, or we been made aware that they are reverting back to the usual dates that preceded Covid?

I can understand US$40k being achievable over many years if you take into account the adjustment for inflation over that time on top of the supply and demand constraints. But over the next 4 years is hugely speculative for them to predict when considering after how their bullish oil bets backfired massively losing them a lot of money last year.

About 5 weeks to go until full year results are published. Will hopefully give transparent cash position. Should show a healthy balance sheet. Expenditure such as for the phase 1 exploration commitments of the two prioritised Zambian licenses had already been allocated from income from period ending sept ‘23! Not unusual to see allocation of funds long in place to satisfy contractual obligations going into an exploratory phase.

Beyond that unless there has been any major outlay to have seen some decent progression of other assets the treasury could be butsting at the seams.

“you ****s id jez zap flip”

Hey cru, I ‘was’ pointing out that you missed the decimal point in front out! Personally I thought my joke was quite clever.

Irish, cru was referring to Silverking that has initial US$500k buy in with further, up to a US$1m invested to then increase xtr interest up to 70%, subject to Cooperlemon's right to maintain its interest in the Licence through an option to earn back up to 70%

I take that as, if they ‘were to’ share the outlay of the second phase half a million each then Xtr interest in the project will remain at 51% as per the initial buy in.

Anyone agree that makes sense?

Quick cru, stick this in . before some bright spark accuses you of putting up another post that has no point!

🤷 😉

If the higher RC grades that will be initially mined in the payback phase can be shown to be amenable to an alternative ore sorting tech they are looking into, it will pave the way for a re evaluation of the capital and operating costs from a reduced size plant, mill etc as a smaller mining scenario of circa 10mt per annum.

This will transform the project.

It will benefit from and improve cash margins by streamlining mining and processing that will also have positive impacts on metal recovery rates too.

Nail on proof of that and it will improve on ‘eventual’ NPV and Project IRR than it would have done without, making the potential of BR’s economic kickstart very desirable alongside that sustainable higher copper price.

US$5/lb hit and up over 5% so far today, strong rally to say the least

CB doesn’t decide what he pays himself, Alistair Ford and Kjeld Thygesen are the remuneration committee members that decide on directors pay based on the size of the company and their experience.

A reminder it was under review in 22 Jez

“Given the stage of the company’s mining exploration projects and the executive chairman experience in managing numerous projects and his familiarity with the company’s projects. It is the companies view that it is appropriate for the roles of chairman and chief executive officer to be combined at this stage. The company will keep this under review until it is deemed necessary to split the roles and can justify the need for a separate chief executive officer role.”

Audit report for 23 out soon, whether or not there have been any major changes since that will see the roles split I wouldn’t count on it.

It’s very apparent that this season has seen a slightly different approach so far, with the likes of Charles Archer asking the questions in previous interviews across the other group companies, Martyn Churchouse the senior geologist, has been supporting CB too and in other podcasts relating to Xtr have seen independent associated industry professionals guesting on Roast PR shows.

Do shareholders prefer this other input or are they happy to just hear Colin solely fronting the company in interviews/podcasts?

Not building a plant, ore will be transferred off site a sold for processing.

Meant to add, if they were going to give a response, they would have already done so

Cont….

To distance themselves from any blame for starters.

I just posted this on TG

It wouldn’t be unusual for the company to release a statement over licenses. Like any shareholder I would welcome one. Many can probably recall the RNS in 2020 answering to comments made in Zambian media over the legal ownership of Kalengwa.

However, I have doubts one will be released this time commenting on the legitimacy of the licensing committee decision with the understanding that the MNMD have had problems with the cadastre system over reporting and consequently, that it has not caused any market volatility.

If Cooperlemon had failed miserably in such basic and simple compliance measures they have cited and ‘was’ under genuine process of appeal, they would ‘then’ be under obligation to have reported the matter of cancellation.

Just to be clear Roasties are out there now, was recorded and put out sane day on 9th when Phil said he was going to be speaking to Cooperlemon after the cancellation iwas commented on TG the day before.

How I understand it Bob

Tony ( Hunter) from Cooperlemon

“Mining license we just got our approval, so we have a mining license now, and of course we had the outside exploration license, so exploration will continue pulling out from the epicentre and the mining license is in the middle , so as soon as we put everything together, production can easily start. We’ll figure out where we can process. But production can start as soon as possible.”

Later in the podcast Tolai goes on to explain the importance of compliance, without it there will be difficulties to move from one stage of license holding, from exploration to mining.

So are doubts they would have got approval on mining without current exploration license and of which was not fully compliant.

With Silverking announcement dated 3rd April ‘24 and appeals to have then been submitted by 1st May ‘24. When were the interviews with Cooperlemon recorded? Couldn’t have been prior to 3rd April, they would have put it out straight away to be current as possible so likely a more recent trip.

Would only make any real sense if his comments were made before the announcement of cancellation was then made shortly after. So doubt are any concerns of legitimacy.

Worth relaying this message posted on telegram from Phil carrol on the 8th after the cancellation of silverking license. For those not joined telegram group.

“They are having a current issue with the Cadastre system with accurate reporting on licenses.. they have had sight of this problem and are working on resolving it.. but for all intents and purposes the licenses are well protected”

Then posted

“Aiming to talk to Cooperlemon Tomorrow for more on this”

Not had a response posted there yet from Phil.

Let’s assume it is successfully appealed and all’s well, silverking mining license was recently issued and mining operations are expected to start in no later than 18 to 24 months, which should see a resource estimate circa 10mt @ 5% being half a million tonnes of contained copper. Assumption is copper equivalent grade as very high silver credits. This, stated by Hunter, who is one of XTR, GLR and AFP geologists on Zambia special.

Will be worth the wait.