Member Info for JDAU

Speak for yourself, I’m relaxed and feeling positive about XTR moving forwards..

For the record Mike, your opinion flys in the face of pretty much everything CB has said about 3990c. It’s not “continuous setbacks”, operations have started over a frankly terrible rainy season, we have a long path ahead of us doing business based primarily on royalty agreements and getting the HR up and running, one might suggest It’ll be a little problematic trying to get royalty payments from something we’ve sold... You clearly lack an understanding of Colin’s business model for XTR; People “might not like to hear that” because you’re wrong, CB took the reigns back from Jan who was in fact trying to sell the asset - he knows what his shareholders want. DYOR.

Worth noting though that HUM currently sits at around a £110m mcap, to value it by a higher PE (nearer some they have been suggested) could add circa £100m to the mcap, i don’t know the whole story, but in my mind the market is simply giving a cautiously rewarding valuation to HUM... on the flip side, XTR is currently worth £6-7m, if you think this won’t be £20m+ with all our operations online then you need to relook at your calcs imo. No offence intended, just getting a little frustrated with all of these (frankly ridiculously low) valuations flying around. If we’re making $3-4m + profit per annum we’re not going to be valued under £20m on the basis of a 3-5xPE, mainly on the basis that an investment firm could buy the whole company for (arguments sake) £20m and be making a 10% plus return a year. I’m in the ballpark for £30-50m valuation once the alluvials are up to speed and the hard rock is being processed, the fact that that may mean a PE closer to 10 is imo irrelevant due to the nature of how we’re making our money (low risk, low expenditure, high return). All imo only, I’m not saying anyone’s wrong, I’m just saying I strongly disagree and the above is why...

CC, i think you’re missing my point. I’m not trying to stop anybody having an opinion, I’m trying to stop posters acting like all shareholders here are unhappy with progress, when I’m fact, some of the biggest holders are content with what’s happening. Also, whilst you may hold the view that “everyone has an equal opinion” that is not true as far as voting anything through is concerned, which was the point I was trying to make.

Exactly that cavity, I’m strictly saying that those posters who keep posting negatives about how “us shareholders” are feeling do not speak for me and my 0.5%. The number makes a difference because if there are, for instance, 10 shareholders each with 100k shares saying “all of us shareholders have no confidence in Colin” whilst I hold the view that he’s doing a good job, then yeah, it actually does give my view more gravitas as if push comes to shove I own more of the company than those 10 shareholders put together and as such, if it came to a vote, my views do in fact matter more. Hence, I am not happy that there are negative posters saying “shareholders aren’t happy” and want to make a point that actually, some of the bigger shareholders in the company are incredibly happy with performance, not necessarily with share price, but that’ll fall in line as Colin keeps up the good work. In short coffeecups, yes, the number of shares I hold does give me a “bigger voice” so to speak, it doesn’t necessarily make me right, but it does mean that when muck like one poster calling for an extraordinary shareholder meeting to chuck out CB is posted about because “shareholders are fed up” I am perfectly entitled to say, no, that’s a load of ... we’re not fed up, especially when the likliehood is that I could outvote said poster - bottom line is that as a substantial shareholder, I’m not happy with people posting negative toss on my behalf.

There’s one shareholder over here that understands and appreciates all of the hard work Colin’s putting in. He’s getting way too much flak in my opinion for doing a sterling job of designing and executing a recovery play for this business with minimal risk to shareholders. I own just under half a percent of the company and i’m more than happy with Colin leading us forward, if y’all could quit with the daily moaning on behalf of “all shareholders” that’d be great - as all you negative posters imo are short sighted and sure as hell don’t speak for me. Keep up the good work Colin, the market will catch on, soon enough...

Batfink, Market valuation is at the best of times, mostly nonsensical, it does, however, work both ways.. which i'd imagine we'll benefit from in the not to distant future. I'm not sure anyone ever stated (as you're suggesting) that it will be 5p by X point, because nobody has (or had) a crystal ball. The market will most likely overvalue us due to hype once we're well into Q2/3/4 alluvial production with hard rock plans agreed on/in motion. At that point, If you don't think that XTR with a DFS'd hard rock project in 3990C, various alluvial contracts getting off the ground and scope for plenty of other development on the other targets (which i've discussed plenty of times before) won't be valued by the market at over �20m then (imo) bigger fool you when you sell out at 5p.

Recommended post Snoots, completely agree with the sentiment.

Did you hit your head whilst exiting the vehicle? 5pps roughly equates to a �20m mcap, one good quarters alluvial production and a sniff of hard rock will shove us up around that point imo.. scrape 5p in a decade indeed..

..for a bed & isa ;)

They are indeed, mine are the first 2 x 25k’s

The 50k & 2 x 25k’s are buys

Andrew, I was reading your figures from yesterday, i’d suggest you revise them using: 31.1g = Ounce (Troy ounce) I’ve mentioned it multiple time’s on this bb - calculations will never be accurate (even as estimations) when the wrong g / oz figure is being used. Hope you don’t think I’m being a pain as I wholly respect that you’re just trying to do some cig packet calcs, but thought you’d want to know.

... and still PoG is $60 higher than what is assumed by the FB DFS. Ref: http://www.lse.co.uk/regulatory-news-article.asp?ArticleCode=yb7wqzq3&ArticleHeadline=Definitive_Feasibility_Study

Yes ;)