Member Info for howezap

>>I'll tell you why they sold, Bird's misinformation selling BR as a T1 project that, without doubt, would be a mine. We now know that's just not the case <

T1 or not, is one thing but you may be misinforming some by appearing to be stating a fact, that it will ‘still’ not be a mine which is not known yet which I’m sure you didn’t actually mean.

Just to add a further point, We do not know just how much of the extra Racecourse tonnage there is that was drilled, but did not make it into the resource estimate as inferred. Not all tonnage would have been added due to insufficient drill hole information at that time. However, there will be ‘known’ areas where further drilling will increase those parts to be included in the resource likely on the margins at RC Adding a further 300kt was suggested there alone, including any extensions which is likely to be or see some targeted next.

Ascot is largely open ended to increase tonnages up to the 2mt if they wanted to, but the recent indications are that only RC will be targeted next to increase the MPV and also value, which would not necessarily be the same thing for the drilling outside the confines of the conceptual pit as NPV relates to the early mining development phase inside it so we should see further drilling central too.

Hi Dani
Don’t let it get to you, opinions are just that. If they wont be dazzled with diamonds, baffle them with bull5hit.

>>One question i wonder why Colin didnt release valuation results prior to doing Preconcentration tests ?

Optimal Mining had identified that the economics of the Project could be improved by modern ore sorting technology, so the full Study will be completed based on the relevant test work that is being done.

Is normal practice, would be pointless and a waste of their time and Xtract money to have continued with the previous development options that will be in the full mining study where NPV and rate of return would be established, without the influence that the pre-concentration study will have on reducing the capital cost that is a key figure.

Hence the interim report just looked at various economic pit shells with only the op costs included.

Zap-a-Dee-doo-Da is having a merry blue day ;-)

Where the pre-concentration study is at present, being half way there. Its success is influenced by various factors with the ‘most’ important first hurdle having being passed. This is basically how it is evaluated if is of interest. But it’s a difficult one to gauge how significant its effect will have on the economics.

Technically, ore sortability relies on the intrinsic ore properties which determine the potential of an ore to be sorted. Several other factors influence sortability, including the commodity price, operating cost, and the metal recovery. The metal recovery and the operating cost are relevant to the sorting performance and influence the metal mass balance which is the balance between the pay and waste rock at sorting. The sorting performance is a function of the ore quality and it’s properties to be diverse in content, and the sorter’s efficiency. While the mass balance of the sorter operation is significantly influenced by the cut-off grade of the sorter’s separating ability.

CB seems confident it will work as good as they are hoping. Early reports must be positive.

An NPV with the IRR for BR will/should/could have an effect on the market cap short term, as there will finally be some numbers for investors to base an investment decision on, particularly so if the pre concentration study shows a positive effect on the economic potential.
5p at least from that with fairbride income increase but dependant on external factors too I would imagine.

Good commenting throughout the day all, thanks.

Results are getting stronger by the month despite the rains. So any further dilution by fund raise is looking less land less likely now if not at all.

Further development talked about again, to increase revenues. A processing facility at Kakuyu to be fed by ‘others’ mines locally and to process the anticipated increased reserves from strike extension will give longevity to that particular increasing revenue stream where there will be 60/40 split of proceeds from current pit increasing to 70% to xtract from any extensions from that further exploration. May give some of that away to a JV partner for bringing in the plant, to mitigate risk.

At fairbride alone, with over a million ounces in ‘current’ reserves to be mined they will want to increase production largely, to bring anticipated LOM of 50 years at current production rate, down. So income could ramp up far more over next 2-5 years

They can concentrate on optimising the pit model by increasing the resource and further the exploration of the other anomalies hinted at, as and when the treasury allows now. All increasing BR value which seems clearer now, that is the intention. Why parcel it up now to be marketable, if they can afford to increase its value far more?
Appears pre-concentration is not a case now, of wether the ore type is amenable, but if that amenability is effective enough to improve NPV as they now know the paydirt v waste percentages per grade. And are waiting on the recovery losses to determine. The down side, another month to wait for that, then the conceptual study can finally be updated. I don’t expect drilling to commence though, until mid Q3-Q4 leading into ‘24 with a PFS by that year end. :-(

A blue long weekend :-)

I do have a gripe with CB to show I’m not being deliberately biased, and that being with this remark when he was defending against BB sceptics like myself at the time, that majors would want to see some measured resource.

CB- “Majors come in when there is reasonable geological justification to assume that you’ve got a big mass of rock that contains a lot of metal.”

That would be true for deposits where the mineralisation type is more predictable to be of consistent grade and thickness. And was the reason why kalumbila only sold for $165m for a loosely inferred 1.5b ton resource.

But it is a false claim for a low grade porphyry deposit, and certainly for one that is bound by targets set within the confines of a buy back agreement where the recipient wants to see the hard numbers that can only be supported by a probable/proven mineral reserve, as it recently transpired.

But at the end of the day, ton for ton BR will command greater value than kalumbila did, due to having a PFS so it will be worth the extra wait.

Going back to the April target set at the beginning of ‘22. Colin never actually said to sell it then, what he actually said was to be in the position to approach Anglo with 2mt and a conceptual pit that works for the decision to mine. Although that was obviously wishful thinking on both fronts anyway as we now know they want to see a PFS. It’s certainly debatable wether Colin actually believed 2mt was realistic and a concept study was going to be adequate.

All the ramping was certainly in the interests of the existing shareholders where potential further dilution was concerned at the time in all honesty. But above all, as it was then, and still is, a genuine importance to get the buy back mechanism triggered to be free from the agreement one way or another. That is the biggest hurdle.

I’m happy with how it has been played overall, understanding what I know now, as long as there is a viable project at the end of it which can get to that point with ideally no more dilution, or if so, by a minimal amount then CB will have done his job.

Anyone wondered why there is a NSR (Net Smelter Return) royalty to AA if the project is eventually sold onto a third party, considering the ore at BR is oxide. Higher grade sulphides are sold on and sent for smelter to be refined, whereas low grade oxides are processed by leaching and refined by electrolysis potentially on site, if there is a plant developed to do so.

The NSR is the net revenue from the sale less refining and transportation costs. The term is named so, due to the fact most of the time, mining output sold, requires further processing by smelters.

Low grade ores though, are not economic enough to be smeltered. But can be economic by leaching as uses far less energy, with capital costs being much less too.

Just passing the time

Try again,
The industry average Open pit ‘mining’ cost distribution is,
Mining 50% consisting, Drilling 5%, Blasting 6% , Digging 9%, Hauling 30%
Milling 50% consisting, Grinding 30%, Flotation 10%, Dewatering 10%

Was just within that range to begin with!

The industry average Open pit ‘mining’ cost distribution is,

In most cases, barren rock is harder and, consequently, more difficult to grind than the mineral carrying ore which is often found in the weaker areas of the rock due to dissemination and other geological factors. The harder the rock, the longer the grinding time and the lower the mill throughput. Also, hard rock results in overgrinding the ore and uses more energy.

So with the increase in head grade by a reduction of the ore by as much as 50% from bulk ore sorting, before it goes for the more energy intensive secondary grinding, in theory, the reduction in energy consumption would be far more than the comparative 50% reduction in ore.

As processing of the Bushranger ore contributes between 49% and 61% of the total production cost across the 16 cases examined in the interim report, BOS will help slash those production costs adding to the positive impact overall toward recoveries, capital and op costs.

The industry average Open pit ‘mining’ cost distribution is,

>>Depleting stocks worldwide drove key commodity trader Trafigura to forecast copper prices will reach a record high this year, while supply and demand imbalances led Goldman Sachs to expect the global shortage of visible copper inventories by September.

•Tradingeconomics.com

Perfect storm brewing.

When Jeffreys Henry LLP were appointed about 18 months ago (at a guess) they specialised in mergers and acquisitions, and working with mid cap companies. It appears they had streamlined their business model at some point.

Don’t be daft NtM, he lost it all on the gee gees.

Colin bought a new racehorse with his money!

Hi Docit I’m wondering where you have got 4 holes from?

There was mention that core samples were sent from 4 ‘previously’ drilled holes for analysis toward the pre-concentration study that determines if the ore is amenable to modern ore sorting technology. The updated conceptual study will then be completed once the results of that pre-concentration study are known.

The further ‘optimisation’ drilling will ‘not’ commence until after the updated conceptual study is back as drilling will be directed from the outcome with recommendations toward increasing tonnages, NPV and further value.

I think folk need to understand the ‘potential’ work that is still required toward getting to pre-feasibility. CB stated himself that it is what they are working toward.

There has been too much false hope given by CB in the past through whatever reason. He appears to have now been bucked that trend in most recent podcasts.

Hi Docit

>>So why has no one bit the mans arm off

Typical porphyry low grade deposits are more cost sensitive as they require lower cut off grades to be economic on start up, than other ore type high grade deposits that can be profitable at much higher cut offs so there are potentially less financial risk involved in acquiring earlier on in the life cycle of the discovery. Unlike huge low grade deposits such as BR that need a viability study to support it before an interested party would consider buying. Porphyry deposits are more favourable due to their long mine life. But they require a mineralised parcel that initially makes them economic to pay back CapEx. Cadia had good gold, Boda has a very high grade breccia zone that goes to surface and BR has the high grade crowns with further potential to be optimised by BOS.

Until there is a positive economic study it’s unlikely an interested party would consider taking the project on anyway. With the legally binding buy back agreement that gives AA first refusal, any acquirer who wanted to buy would inherit the agreement so it would deter such actions.

So until one or both of the AA options to buy back in are triggered and the agreed mechanism toward a buy back decision has been made, the only way we could sell to another party is if AA declare they don’t want it.

Agree though, the funding of and the extent of further drilling are the uncertainties at present. Although they have already, or are currently still planning the next drilling.

Don’t mean to jump the gun, there is no certainty RC is amenable to BOS so is dependent on. Would hope the pre-concentration study would be reported when its findings are known.

A fair synopsis from this AM NtM , as from the offset of phase 2 it was necessary to have the funds in place to cover the contractual obligations of that exploration phase. So is likely a similar approach will be adopted for the ‘optimisation’ phase.

One obvious scenario is the company have gone into care and maintenance with a trickle of news to string it along until there is a change in ‘market sentiment’. Any decent reportable news you would think just be wasted if there is a lack of general investor confidence overall.

However, maybe not all so intentionally, as the updated conceptual study is having to be reworked.

The grinding mill is usually the bottleneck in the grinding circuit and can determine the total capacity of the processing plant. Waste rock occupies space in the ore fed to the grinding mill, thus lowering the mill’s ore grinding capacity ‘and’ determines the required concentrator’s production rate.

So with bulk ore sorting, there needs to be a complete re-evaluation of all of the concentrate production capacities not just wether or not the ore type will be amenable to the technology and what the increases in head grades will result if so. The ‘whole’ circuit is affected which is why the study needs to be re-worked which takes time.

>>>I really have a feeling we could be seeing the end game of Colin Bird and his nest of so called 'businesses'.

What utter nonsense. And to prey on people’s emotions that are no doubt worried in these times of global economic uncertainty is clear you are not a very nice person above all of your other failings.

From the same person that told us previously we should ignore the fundamentals.

Kwaks share price examples do not take into account dilution, and subsequent development of, or further assets acquired in that time.

With increasing environmental and social challenges and risks related to water and tailings management, they act as drivers to find solutions for reducing the high water and energy usage in mining operations.

Application of dry processing technologies in mineral processing operations where the pre-treatment of ores prior to grinding to reduce energy consumption, and to chemically alter mineral surfaces to be more prone to dry or waterless separation, are important areas of research.

There are several issues with pre-treatment and waterless operations to overcome. In some cases the new alternative may lead to the higher carbon footprint. The use of some solvents to replace water or when recovery and recycling of that secondary raw material is environmentally more harmful than production from just the mineral. Handling, transport and disposal of dry or waterless fine tailings can also be a challenge due to excessive dust that needs to be overcome.

Bulk ore sorting is just the start of how modern new world mines will operate to exploit every ounce of mineral as economically and with far less environmental impact from a resource as feasible.

If these new technologies can all be utilised particularly waterless processing, then Bulk ore sorting can also be applied in tailings recycling. Any tailings which can be placed and conveyed on belt conveyors can be pre-concentrated further.

You can see where the industry is going.
But important to remember, the declining average grades mined are ‘not’ just solely due to depleting higher grades but due in part to the advancements in processing technologies over the last 30 years that have allowed lower grades to be exploited.

So where will the copper come from in the future? That’s where!