Member Info for Jamesiecakes

Howezap

Partner DD is one of the starting points before you do any deal with someone…. Maybe things came to light/changed after the deal was signed which can happen obviously. My frustration isn’t so much failed project (Moz Gold apart which was a shocker) I expect that in this game but the way shareholders are told about failed projects, surely a presentation not mentioning a project isn’t how we should find out it’s no longer a focus (or hidden in the annual report). CB promised walks and all which is the least he can do, but sadly I dont believe he is doing this.

On a more optimistic note I thought the deck looked good and there was some information I didn’t know

Cheers

James

Good to see CB topping up

Hi ZM

I’m puzzled about what the welcome news was today on fairbride? The alluvials and small hard rock is ticking along, explorator share seems to have decreased Q on Q (in % terms). Fairbride production for the quarter seems ok but who knows how much if any goes to XTR and weirdly no mention of how things progressed in Q4 or at least up to end of November etc.

Cheers

James

So think we can probably expect a interview tomorrow, let’s see

The guy Kevin posted this on telegram yesterday

Not lost interest at all gentlemen, we had decisions to make, there maybe a twist wait till Friday ? (PS we have many more than 12 clients) but not all the 12 are clients !

I must have misread your post Steve…

That last one I fully agree with though!

not sure how you can be so confident that Opex won't increase by 100%, based on MRE we would be processing 3x the amount of rock and if processing cost are roughly 50% of total opex (this could of course be wrong) it would make sense that the opex cost roughly doubles from the conceptual study.

As you say time will tell

Hi Stevemocal

The presentation you posted seems to show the Opex breakdown for an underground mine? My understanding is that this breakdown will be vastly different for an open pit mine?

For example if you look at the Caravel or the EVA copper project feasibility studies which I believe are reasonable benchmarks (although fully appreciate each project has its own idiosyncrasies’) you can see that processing costs make up approx. 50% of the Operating costs. Based on these benchmarks I would expect a material increase in Opex, from the conceptual study (I’m sure there will be other incremental costs as well).

https://caravelminerals.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/2022-09-20-PFS-Optimisation-Study-Update-and-Results.pdf

https://cumtn.com/site/assets/files/3661/ni_43-101_eva_copper_fs_update_final_07-may-2020_2.pdf

Cheers

James

Hi RWT2

Perhaps a dumb question, but how do you know this?

Cheers

James

Ben

Better than bloody 144th!

Cheers

James

I’ve done pretty much the same thing as Steve, and agree more or less with his numbers. What I see is that the outside the “high grade” material it’s sub economic (Opex costs are higher than revenue)

However I don’t believe Steve numbers incorporated upside from Ascot, a few years of high grade material which is easy to get to changes the story. If Opex can be reduced on a $/t things again look much better. So a few ifs and fingers crossed but I don’t think the deposit is without hope

LW

I understood he was saying the incremental value of each tonne (once Capex was paid back) would be $10/t or approx $200m gross profit a year. However I think it should be taken with a pinch of salt as I’m sure it’s the optimistic view and my understanding could of course be wrong.

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

I don’t think we will hit 100kg either but I’d expect us to be at 70kg or there about, as they should be running the higher grade ore by then so income should be nicely ramping up.

CB is certainly not an idiot but at the same time if there isn’t income from FB he might not have a choice than to go cap in hand to the market. FB is a share of net operating income, if the operating costs are greater than gold generated our share would be 0 (different to the empress royalty agreement). Obviously XTR could be receiving income from FB already but I find it strange that XTR wouldn’t have announced this even if it wasn’t material.

Hopefully FB hits serious production before year end and we don’t need to find out if a raise is required or not

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

My understanding is they are running low grade ore through the plant at the moment to jam any holes (not the technical term), once they are satisfied that the plant is operating efficiently then the better stuff will be run through which should get us to this 100kg a month or so. Not to look an idiot for the 67th time believing CB deadlines but until otherwise advised I think we will still hit commercial production by year end “(Commercial production is defined in the Collaboration Agreement as a being installation of a processing plant with a throughput capacity of not less than 29,000 tonnes per month (being 70% of the planned 42,000 tonnes per month throughput).

If they don’t start generating cash from FB shortly I think they will be back to the market with their “begging bowl” just for working capital purposes which would be very frustrating.

Cheers

James

Steve

Current share in issue are approx 850m, however with unexercised options/warrants the fully diluted figure will be around 1bn (assuming the share price is above 10p)

Cheers

James

Hey Ian

Without checking they have issued approx 250m shares since the intra day high.

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

Looking at the below, which we know was sold for 170m upfront and 60 deferred consideration.

I get copper revenue of 6.3bn, using 8k per tonne, and gold revenue of 0.5bn using 1750 per oz. So 6.8bn total, if you then take the Eva project sale price you get between 2.5%-3.5% of in ground value (170-230 sales price).

https://cumtn.com/operations/eva-copper-project/overview/

I think the Eva project is more mature, but good to see there is so much headroom between your 1.75% (I use a similar figure) and what Eva sold copper mountain for assuming I’ve not messed up on the calc.

Cheers

James

Hi Andrew

Thanks for posting, aren’t the grades much higher than what XTR are likely to have? It’s 0.49 g/t AU and 0.27% CU, or around 0.6% cueq (unless my maths are bad).

Interestingly they are quite conservative with the prices used.

Cheers

James

Nothing to do with expectations in my opinion, the premium is broadly the same as the 10p options so more likely just policy to issues options at 50-60% premium (round numbers on the option price)

I actually take the fact that Joel has taken shares intend of salary as quite positive

Banzai

The issues is that if the operating costs of the ramp up are greater than the revenue generated then XTR get 0 from FB. I would imagine that is currently the case as we know the plant is being tested, XTR haven’t declared first income etc. My impression from the AGM was without FB income this year a small raise would be required (obviously this wasn’t explicitly stated)

I agree there is lots to be positive about, FB is going to start generating serious income shortly and BR a fantastic asset with huge potential

However there are also some concerns largely around missed deliverables (time and time again), CB has a history of kicking the can down the road when there is bad news. As mentioned above without FB coming online shortly I’m worried about finances. There are also larger macro issues, not that the company can do much about these.

I do find it a bit frustrating when people on here just whinge, however as investors we also need to understand that there are issues with XTR.

Cheers

James