Member Info for howezap

More chance of a tierdrop or two LW if this share price drops much further.

I don’t think that little fat chap could get his arms around it now to tie it, if he wanted to.

Whatever the amount of drilling required and whenever, to finalise the programme which I’m sure will include some infilling to upgrade more of the resource, will then see a further JORC update which will then go onto form the basis of the PFS to support decision to mine option to go to Anglo.

They will want to include every bit of ore in this model which could then see the PFS take anywhere between 3-5 months to complete thereafter.

There are still some uncertainties as to the extent which would lead up to going to PFS I think.

My take, but open to others opinions on matter.

To be fair though Cygnus the refining process to a saleable concentrate takes it to around 99% purity anyway so the answer to my question could well be no as the differences between concentrate purities looks to be very marginal.

Hi Cygnus sorry I wasn’t maybe clear. Yes, there are the known gains from pre-concentrate sorting, which does lead to a ‘cleaner’ concentrate as is produced from a higher head grade. It’s after this process when the concentrate is sold on for smeltering. Unless the plant will have on site furnaces for smelting. But nether the less as have said, smelter returns are highly affected by grades and impurities in the concentrate.

With the benefit of higher head grades from pre-concentration, it produces a higher quality concentrate. This then has a major effect on the further downstream processing and relative op cost since concentrate treatment charges and smelter returns are highly affected by grades and impurities in the concentrate.

My question, are there different rates paid, dependant on the quality of concentrate? This would then go some way to impair the losses from sorting.

Hi Vulcan, you do share a very similar rhetoric to kwak, that’s all I can say, but your and their opinions are just as valid of course.

The success of this investment has got little to do with the current declining share price or so called promises made, and everything to do with now being potentially a sustainable mining company.

‘Potentially,’ being that production rate from fairbride still to be confirmed, but you don’t need to be concerned with what CB has said, the feasibility study outlines mining rate and is what the new plant is based on.

As for BR, the investment opportunity is based on the degree of probability that the project will be sold and developed by a major, of which that position is closer now than it was when the share price was at 7p. Porphyry deposits are huge and require time and money to prove up to level of viability. That, we have all learned and have to accept or exit when appropriate.

The market doesn’t know best, the market for most AIM listed companies are private investors of which most are fickle and/or too impatient.

Just kwak patting himself on the back from his other guise, acting as if he is the third person.

>> I very much doubt that. <<

Yes you could very well be right Andrew is I know one of them in particular are never going to admit they were wrong!

Have taken portions from a 2019 research paper and edited to translate into a more understandable and relevant piece to give more insight into sortability modelling.

>>>BOS relies on online sensor analysis of bulk materials in a plant ore stream, where successive ‘pods’ of ore are separated as upgraded product for further processing and low-grade materials for rejection. The advantages of BOS include improving resource utilisation, reducing environmental footprint, increasing feed grade, reducing energy and transport costs, and minimising tailing production.

Despite the apparent benefits, the acceptance of BOS in the mining industry has been slow. One barrier is the lack of knowledge of the feasibility of BOS implementation for certain mines, termed ‘sortability’. Sortability is a comprehensive concept. 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 metal market 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. The sorting performance is a function of the ore heterogeneity and sorter efficiency, while the mass balance of the sorter operation is significantly influenced by the cut-off grade of the sorter separation.
Sortability is difficult to assess because of the complicated influence of various factors. A case-by-case approach has usually been adopted in current research where assumptions were usually made concerning ore properties and the COG was determined arbitrarily. In this research, the fractal structure of metal distribution within the ore deposits was recognised, and a BOS model was developed to assess the BOS where ore properties were characterised in relation to sortability, the optimum COG for sorter operation was determined, and the economics potential of BOS was evaluated.
Based on the developed model, the bulk ore sortability of different ore properties was assessed with a hypothetical underground copper mine. The developed model is expected to advance the understanding of BOS and provides a mathematical tool of sortability assessment for future BOS studies.<<<

The more I look into modern bulk ore sorting the more confident I am that BR will be amenable to it. You would think that every company with a resource that is at conceptual stage would be looking to utilise the technology.

The advantages in improving the economics by rejecting barren rock and the very low grade ore with no economic significance at pre-concentration and further processing are significant. Not to mention the ability to reduce energy, water, and chemical requirements with reducing the amount of ore to be processed.

But despite the huge benefits, BOS is not actually applied as widely as you would think. One reason for this is the difficulty to assess the sortability of an ore and to evaluate the amenability of a modern BOS system as it is still a relatively new tech and every deposit is different.

As Optimal have recommended the technology they would have done so on the assessment of the ore properties in relation to their known sortability from a BOS model. They would simply not have recommended it, if they did not believe that BOS could be developed.

Will definitely be a game changer for economic viability and a bit of a curve ball that most did not expect, and to put all the negativity toward BR’s ‘typical porphyry’ low grades to bed.

Budding mining analysts will have to do another spreadsheet, Bitcoinbuyer will finally shut up about fuel costs, FatherTedFeck might finally see the light and all this pessimism will hopefully give shareholders old and new some optimism.

Empress have a debt facility in place confirmed by Alexandra W Sherron of up to 50 million with 5million earmarked for any further development work at their 3 producing streams which includes Manica.

Ties in nicely with CB’s suggestion that a decision will need to be made in the next couple or three months to go ahead with plant extension to accept sulphides.

From metals investor forum a couple of weeks ago with Brien Lundin on you tube

Just going back to the website upgrade, I believe the omission of the updated RC resource and ascot MRE from there is just down to not having the updated conceptual, with financial study in place to give firm economic support to the apparent reduction in average grade with the increase in resource since the original 71mt. Which imo would not show the updated resource in its best light.

The only reason the JORC were updated was to present the data for conceptual study to see where it can be further optimised. So BR ‘may’ get an update on the website after the full conceptual study comes back, but it could be, that they may even wait until after ‘all’ further work is completed with a PFS in place when truer realistic and less speculative values can be shown.

Would you update something that is not going to show it at its optimum and will change and improve further anyway?

He is a consultant geologist! He wouldn’t be a very successful one if he wasn’t open to being ‘thinly spread’

Hi Ben
>>….Eureka removed from the website completely. It seems Colin does just like the latest toy to play with and that it Kakuyu at the moment. ?

Arguably a fair point you make, but one the could simply be based on the economics to deliver greater returns in the short term. After all, the KPZ deal for Eureka is or was a rigid 50/50 split, whereas the deal for Kakuyu with Oval mining and their partners, who hold the license is for 60% of net profit from mining operations, increasing to 70% interest accruing for any additional mineral resources discovered during the course of Xtract's exploration programme.

At face value it looks a far better deal giving xtract greater control without the potential incompatibilities that can occur with the funding and expectation problems between 50/50 JV partners that may also have different profit/outcome expectations.

Kakuyu is well understood and in a fertile area that the geological team including Martyn Churchouse have obviously given it a thumbs up. MC is a Geologist and consultant with over 40 years experience working in the mining industry now MD of CB’s Kendrick resource.

Now the company are potentially self sustainable, the next leg up will be determined by its ability to maximise further growth potential without the risk of stuttering or stalling that momentum due to JV partner incompatibility.

Who have just had to give away 20% of the company for ongoing exploration btw Ted.
We are “down with that sort of thing” here now Ted

FTF was referring to ‘Collective Mining’ who have recently released a good drill result from one of their porphyry projects in Columbia. He is being his usual self in bashing BR……..in Australia with just one drill hole. Yawn

Iceberg stated back in ‘21 he would prob sell when the JORC was updated, surely not just yet as I believe on recollection, his average was around 4p back then. The JORC will no doubt be updated again at the end of any
‘further’ drill programmes as they will want t include all additional ore before the next study comes out.
I don’t mean the one we are waiting for now btw.
I’m sure he has just gone quiet for now whilst licking his wounds.

Hi Dani I would add to my late night drunken ramble that inferred resource ‘can’ be included in a PFS but not to support one. As we have been informed that AA will want to see we are heading toward financing, it is a fair assumption on my part that the resource, particularly what falls inside the outlines of the open pit will at some point be upgraded. Any financier will want to see probable or proven reserves before any considerations to evaluate, toward financing a project. All projects follow a particular pathway and BR is no different.

It has been noted previous, coming from Colin that although they need to show an ability to finance (20%) they do not need to have funds in place.

I’m sure it will be sold outright and that is the intent still, if that option arises from whoever. But the option to bring in a bigger partner to develop it can not be ruled out completely if a deal is beneficial. But historically, juniors that go in with majors get shafted one way or another and end up being diluted out.

Just for balance, at the ‘21 AGM Colin gave the first real indication of the task in hand by stating they were looking at taking on some small mining operations in Africa through JV’s ‘to pay toward the drilling efforts in Oz’

Within that growth strategy, it is to identify projects that are within two years to production.

If members cannot see by now, that the 2mt hook and tie a bow round it and sell it approach was just to try to manipulate the share price by driving up the market cap to reduce any further dilution until the point that there is meaningfull income from Fairbride and other sources contributing. Then they are simply ignoring or just not seeing or understanding the bigger picture.

Even if 2mt was hit, without any viability study to support it, AA or any other major would still not have likely taken it on.
Majors buy success, and large bulk tonnage low grade porphyry deposits are more cost sensitive as they require lower cut off grades to be economic than other ore type high grade deposits that can be profitable at much higher cut offs so there are potentially less risks involved.