Member Info for iWantThatOne

Howezap, thanks for sharing that. Have to say, there's a lot in that explanation I don't understand. What "intercompany account" is being referred to, and what monies are being transferred through to XTR to "carry on exploration"? And the idea that the acquirer purchases Bushranger directly from individual shareholders to avoid any "sale" or profit arising in XTR itself sounds implausible. We could do with a top-level tax lawyer on the Board (with apologies to Thediddymen is he/she is one!).

And HUM would then have to finance Dugbe alone - that’s only $400m initial capex so hey, nothing to worry about there then.

Yep Butlerman, that’s spot on. And if you also have shares in your taxed account that are currently loss-making you can sell them to crystallise the loss and mitigate any gains from selling XTR right now. You just then wait 30 days to buy them back. Of course there’s frictional costs in doing all this (bid-offer spread, dealing costs) so how effective these tactics are depends on your personal circumstances.

Of course if people have ISA assets in other stocks then they could sell those and buy XTR, whilst simultaneously selling XTR in their taxable accounts to maintain the same overall holdings. That might generate taxable capital gains in this tax year but they’ll be much lower (we all hope) than next!

Re the Prospectore discussion, we shareholders don’t have shares in Prospectore - we have them in XTR, ie the former is simply an investment of our company. The sale agreement may allow for an all-share deal, but in that case we’d be offered AA shares, not those of Prospectore (or at least that’d be the usual approach - AA would only want shares at the holding company level). XTR would remain as an entity of course, with its African assets remaining, and we’d retain our current shareholdings but the share price would drop back to reflect the assets that are left. This approach would remove concerns about everyone trying to cash out at the same time, because AA is so big there’d be relatively little effect on its share price as people sell. And/or there could be a cash element. That’s my thinking anyway.

Berenberg, whilst mentioning the app angle for Bango, clearly still sees the company as a payments business. It looks like their 300p price target is based on the 30% discount to peers that they quote. IMO that undervalues the future contribution from the data side, which should rapidly accelerate from here.

The company has clearly signalled that it expects to have a fully-working machine around the end of Q1. There is absolutely no reason to think that the final stages are proving problematic just because nothing has been announced by early-February.

I took CB’s vague agreement to close to a $1bn price tag with a pinch of salt - I could almost see him looking up at the ceiling and rolling various figures around in his head. As reliable as Harry Redknapp, for the footy fans out there. $1bn would equate to just less than 4Mt (inc Ascot) x 3% x $9000 POC. Seems a big stretch to me, but who knows?

If presented with a hostile low-ball bid, could the company not commission it’s own independent valuation of BR, as it stands at the time? Admittedly this may be based on incomplete information but a value higher than the bid might well convince current shareholders to reject it.

No he didn’t say it could be a ten-bagger. He said something like “some people are talking of a ten-bagger”. Quite a difference!

Much as I think bonker99 is over-optimistic, I tend to agree that Dugbe alone (post-DFS) justifies the current share price (I reckon $50m+). However the current BOD seem to have an unparalleled ability to stuff things up. I’ve submitted three questions for the investor event on Thursday, all focused on accountability - for operational issues at Yanfolila and for perennial share price under-performance. Poor performance should have consequences. How I’d welcome a takeover bid , or even better - the Chairman telling DB he can’t go on.

Sq52, have we an idea where holes 37-40 are? You suggest the next set of holes might be in Ascot, which may well be true, but we know RC is open to the S /SW and more holes will be needed there. I’m struggling to see how one drill will be enough for everything that still needs doing.

Looking at the Josemaria FS, it does actually look bigger than Bushranger to me - depending how we view Ascot. If you take Measured + Indicated + Inferred, the contained copper is 4.7Mt at 0.1% cut-off. There's a table that shows this amount reduces only marginally at 0.2% cut-off. In addition there's a lot of gold (10.1m ozs) and silver (52.1m ozs). At current market prices the copper equates to 70% of the total value. If you convert the gold and silver market values to copper then (very crudely!) the mine could be considered to be a 6.7Mt copper mine.

Against this, it looks very heavy on capex - $3.0bn initial, including a 250km road and power line. As a non-expert, recoveries also look lowish - 85% copper, 65% gold, 72% silver. It's almost all sulphide material, suggesting higher opex? So the amount of metals might be substantially offset by the cost of extraction - possibly.......

Gixxer, I'm not sure how a bigger PR push will help much at this stage because - as CB has acknowledged - the entire set of investors at XTR is retail. IIs won't get involved in something that doesn't even have an updated MRE and has such a low mcap. As such, I'm not sure they'd be willing to try a pre-emptive buy-out. How would they get that one past their risk committees and internal governance? They don't gamble like that. Greater PR might get more retail investors involved but we'd also see more traders messing around with an increasing SP. I'm happy to wait for the updated model and MRE to be the catalyst for the next leg up.

With CB’s mention of M&A in his latest Zak episode I thought I’d check how Caravel Minerals is doing. Down 16.7% yesterday and 25% in a week! Mcap now 120mAUD (c£65m) for the largest undeveloped copper project in Oz (its own words). 2.46Mt contained copper at 0.15% cut-off.

NEL is suffering because it’s still loss-making and positive earnings are some way into the future. Doesn’t matter that it has sales revenue now, the market doesn’t see its mcap as justifiable. Also doesn’t matter how big its factory is if there aren’t enough orders.

Something positive for AFC - a Bloomberg report believes alkaline water electrolysis solutions will significantly exceed PEM in 2022 due to its lower cost. Good for us if Alkamem can find its way into the solutions being offered by the big electrolysis companies. Or even if AFC looks to add electrolysis to its own product suite, much like Ceres Power.

Thanks RP, is that 22p before any further equity raises to build the plant? (Think so). Though I’m still confused as to the likely cost of the plant - the term sheet covers $25m build cost but that’d be ridiculously cheap - surely it’ll cost a lot more? Anyone?

What, due to delays in news (not expected until nearer end-Q1) rather than main markets crashing, interest rate fears being stoked and Putin’s tanks on Ukraine’s borders? I know where I’d lay the blame...

Yep, thanks Thordon. More of those please!