Member Info for Jamesiecakes

Hi All

Thanks, but looking at the business plan assumptions for both scenarios (slide 20) they show 2021 processing rate at 1325 tpd this would be the average rate not exit rate.

I know there has been a 5 week delay in financing, which then took the rebuild into Xmas. So call this a generous 2 month delay. However by my (albeit crappy) maths this still shouldn't reduce planned production from approx 10k to between 6.6k -7.4K we should still be at at least 8k, unless there have been other delays which I am now aware of (or TB is going for the under promise over deliver type of guidance).

What I am trying to get at is based on what I understand the price increases should offset and more the production decrease, hence 2021 cash flow based on the other variables should be better than the forecast $8m loss and some of the dilution (at what I perceive a crappy price based on business fundamentals) could have potentially been avoided.

Cheers

James

Hi Cornish

Looking at the deck, I can see there is a processing rate of 1325 tpd in both scenarios with a grade of just over 2%. So unless I’ve made a typo this is approx 10k tonnes per year of copper, other than the delay in financing has there been any other explanation as to why the 2021 forecast is now 6.6k-7.4K tonnes per year?

It seems that the $8-$10m loss for 2021 was based on copper at $2.9/lb so at today’s price with 50% hedged so say $3.75/lb average our revenue should have been 20% higher than the business plan which would have covered the forecast 2021 loss (at the original production rates) hence mitigating the need for the raise (or at least so much dilution).

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

Interesting analysis, however I thought Northparks was an operational mine when sold? If so the acquisition obviously includes both reserves and infrastructure (mine etc) meaning that we should be more pessimistic than 4.25% of contained copper. I also understand the category of reserve will impact the %, right now we are inferred which will again attract a lower % than if this moves to indicated etc.

Cheers

James

Tell me a tale of the civils being complete at Manica, the plant being transported from SA, while the construction being ahead of schedule can be my happy ever after!

I wouldn’t mind hearing more about Eureka, Kalengwa or Manica

But fully agree hole 3 can wait until Monday :-)

What makes you think hole 3 is way past planned depth, the only info I have seen is that hole 3 is planned to 775m (granted I think this is out of date). Then if you take depth at last RNS and then add 70m/d * 7 you pretty much arrive at this planned depth figure....

For me if we don’t get an RNS today I’ll start assuming this is another hole which exceeds expectations (in terms of length), and if we do get an RNS today I’d expect us to be around 800m which is hardly a bad thing!

https://www.share-talk.com/xtract-resources-plc-update-with-colin-bird-executive-chairman-xtr-l-interview/#gs.tvgu93

Hi Steve

For me the issue is that we have some information, probably some of which is out of date e.g. if you look at the below map (25th RNS) you can see where hole 3 was proposed, then if you go NNW from the hole location it appears to be testing new locations (granted I don’t think we know which direction hole 2 went) so not sure (in my very limited drilling knowledge) how this would help prove up the 3D model? So I guess the location has changed, but can’t be sure as this isn’t clear to me from the RNS.

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8229M_2-2021-1-25.pdf

I am expecting a clear picture of all of the activities they have carried out once the phase 1 drilling has been complete and the team have had time to digest all the information, and as a long term holder here I’m both happy and excited to wait for this.

Cheers

James

Hi CE

Based on the below drill 3 is for 775m, although as you mention this could easily have changed now. It’s a shame CB didn’t give a little more info on this hole in terms of target depth.

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8229M_2-2021-1-25.pdf

Cheers

James

Hi CE

My biggest concern is that they will drill to target depth (which we don’t know) regardless of whether they have passed through mineralisation, I understand they would do this for modelling purposes eg gather full information (happy to be corrected on this)

I know CB says no news is good news, but I’ve been disappointed before from comments in videos to reality so won’t take this for a given until we get an RNS confirming this.

Cheers

James

Hi Glixxer

Regarding lack of XRF results for hole 2 it seems to me (from going back into the RNS) that no XRF results were conducted while drilling was on going, several mentions of visual copper eg (28 jan RNS)

“ Copper mineralisation, in the form of weak disseminated and fracture-fill chalcopyrite associated with green, propylitic alteration of the bedrock, has been visually identified in core since about 130m depth and has gradually become stronger from 340m towards the current hole depth of 405m”

but nothing about XRF results until the 5th of Feb RNS were it was stated

“ Drill core will now be logged in detail and copper grades will initially be assessed using a hand-held XRF spectrometer prior to sampling for full laboratory analysis for copper, gold and other accompanying elements”

This is quite different to the hole 1 RNS were XRF were continuously mentioned, eg from the 15 jan

“ The Company is using a hand-held pXRF Analyser to provide preliminary indications of copper content and samples for definitive geochemical assay will be submitted to the geochemical laboratory on a progressive basis.”

I’m personally happy to wait for the assay results but perhaps based on my above suggestion we will get hole XRFs next week

Cheers

James

That’s fair, and it’s definitely a positive even if he just sticks with current holding for the time being but I hope you are right and he’s building a stake!

Appreciate the input

Cheers

James

Thanks for the response Rollinginit, and good news

I would imagine they are done buying now then, not sure why they would confirm they brought in f they intended to buy more?

Hi Rollinginit

Don’t get me wrong it sounds a lot like he is talking about XTR, but where has this been confirmed?

Cheers

James

Hi CE

Call me a pessimist but I don’t think we will be getting revenue of $40 million from Eureka.

CB has previously stated we will get 55-60% to of spot copper for the concentrate, and we only have 50% of the project? In addition not sure if there is any royalty due to the government/land owners.

For me we will only get up to roughly $40m revenue once all projects come online (even then we may not depending on how the accounting treatments work eg in Manica it’s basically a NPI so our revenue may just be the monthly cash flow).

Having said that the market will value us on our cash generation not revenue (plus obviously BR potential)

Hope my waffle makes sense

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

My notes are similar in terms of FCF, however I also noted down that Eureka was to be a 360k ton pa project. We are now 250k-300k, so it’s logical that the FCF would be a bit less (although I suspect copper price has offset)

Cheers

James

Hi CE

Regarding your Eureka calculations, I understand that we won’t get spot copper but approx 60% and from memory this is a JV with KPZ as well (50:50 I think). Happy to be corrected on either of these points.

But assuming the above is correct I’ll expect revenue in the region of $12m - $18m, and FCF of $250k ( I am assuming the slightly smaller project from what CB previously mentioned is offset by higher prices).

Cheers

James

Hi CE

I have in my notes from the July presentation ( I think this was a TW one before they fell out.....) that the Eureka plan is to mine 360k tonnes per year and that they will receive 55-60% of copper price for the concentrate. They are targeting a mine life of 5-6 years, and generating $250k FCF per month.

I also have a note from the interview that they are budgeting copper at $5k/ton, not sure if this is what CB used when saying the $250k figure but I am sure there is upside to $250k as price in July was around $6.5k/ton (this assumes the scale of the project and price as a % of spot copper still hold).

Lots to be excited about!

Cheers

James

Hi Dibs

No moaning on my part about the warrants, simply pointing out that there is likely to be a few more of these type RNS (cyber mentioned only 5 million) based on historic raises!

Cheers

James

I think these are from the previous fundraiser where there were 27 million warrants at 1.85p, so still another 25 million of these left