Member Info for JP2000

FK: if there is a delay (and surely weeks not months) the clue to was a couple of months ago in a joint Ben Turney / Brett Grist interview. Brett is asked this very question and spends a good 3 minutes waffling and eventually says end of Q3 (sept). I couldn't tell whether it was poor presentation skills and nerves or if there was something going on in the background, perhaps all 3?

CT: are these independent assay results or the company geologist? worth checking as KAV had a major issue two years ago.

That said I have high expectations when KAV starts drilling likely around end of Sept or Oct. KCB is a proven copper
region which de-risks things for KAV. The drilling is cheap, shallow, reverse circulation so KAV is not betting the farm on a single drill. If KAV finds 70m @2% copper I'll be delighted although one of the value game changers for KAV is creating a maiden JORC resource.

Can anyone tell me what's going on at Panther, we seem to be making zero progress in Ontario?

The industry standard is $200/m i.e. $400,000 for 2,000m

KAV haven't released a figure
Not clear if assay costs are extra
What the specific costs are for Botswana (i.e. is labour cheap)
Mindea seem happy to take equity at 4p for half the fee
Its not clear whether the standard drill cost is per linear or vertical meter, there's a big difference with a 45 degree drill

BT has spent a huge amount of time over the last 2 months flogging the IOCG theory and the sum of all that work is zilch, in fact the share price has fallen along with peers.

Why when a small percentage of the lowest NPV turns KAV SP into a 10 bagger?

1) the market is not interested in small mining stocks until they reach investment grade.
2) investment grade can mean anything but if that means a JORC resource with holes every 50m then that's a lot of 2000m holes and the implication is a huge amount of dilution for shareholders.
3) with the interviews, there's always a few elephants in the room which the interviewer is either reluctant to ask or they're not close enough to know what questions to ask.
4) BT says KAV delivered everything they said it would. This really annoys me when they spend 3 months (6-8 weeks direct drilling) drilling B1 with obvious results (they were extremely annoying results)
5) I keep thinking the GRS is like wanting to mine an asteroid of solid palladium....just one or two engineering challenges!
6) The lack of assay data from the GRS geological hole, BT mentions 5% magnetite or is that the sum of the evidence?
7) Talk is cheap & investors want timetables and plans.

Releasing an exploration plan in a couple of weeks and intending to drill Karoo + GRS with a single drill hole which makes sense if technically feasible and the targets align, they'll need a bigger rig but that's not a problem.

Some people might be looking at high AISC because they don't currently have economies of scale and commodity prices are falling because of China and the market cap is £52m, which to be frank is valuing ATM as if Stage 1, phase 2 had already been completed.

and the warrants......

POW not got a pot to **** in so if the warrants get converted while that's good for Ben collecting cash, the PIs/share price gets shafted because the new shares get immediately sold or worse dripped into the market over 6 months.

If POW were basically getting back their investment then the deal is fine but has their investment created any real value, not really.

How much cash & equivalents have POW invested?

How much value does POW get from the deal?

The obvious question which the KSZ report should start to answer is how many priority and high priority targets have been identified (its very early days and they are running extensive surveys). Drill B1, bank a proper discovery and then announce a dozen high priorities and KAV will get it's mojo back.

Depends on thickness & grades, 50m of 1% Cu then no but 14,000s is super massive which is high grade.

My theory on KSZ report is they’ve had external experts contributing, KAV wants a particular outcome but they’ve only drilled 4 holes and perhaps the assay results and core analysis only support a limited conclusion i.e sitting on the fence. That said I’d refer anyone to drill Tad 2 and BT’s post market close announcement and presentations, although the conundrum is why given the former BT sat on the assay results for at least 6 months.

JV - no thanks. Larger (producer) partners are looking for investment grade projects rather than early stage exploration. KCB is cheap and quick to drill which gives KAV the opportunity to create a JORC resource at which point the value markedly increases. It will take 100 holes x 200m @ c $70/m (reverse circulation cost), Mindea seem happy to subsidise 50% @ 4p/s so this project is financially doable in complete contrast to GRS.

POW's stated aim is to concentrate on Uranium hence the divestment although they did recently buyout Molopo, fact is they're running out of cash so please to be taking control of KCB.

Analysis - basically a duster and they’ve given up

I8 analysis:

https://www.kavangoresources.com/media-library/news-release-media/rns15june2022

There's not been any news since the announcement they were drilling deeper and at that point they were 480m. The angle of the drill looks like its going away from the central intrusion. Going to suggest the drill stopped at 600m and they've moved to the opposite side of i8 for a second drill which could easily be at 200-300m depth.

I sense BT wants to stop giving running commentaries but on the other hand he regularly hypes things up. He basically gave no info on i1 and instead led heavily with the pre drill analysis on i8. Baring mechanical failure i8 (1) must have finished 10(?) days ago . BT said he expected all Ditau drilling to be finish by the end of July suggesting i8(2) has a further week of drilling followed by a final drill in i1(?) or somewhere else.

Look on the bright side, less than 3 months until KAV starts drilling.

any idea when the Obonga drills will start?

They will identify carbonatites (source of REE ) very quickly by visual inspection because they're distinctive and you would think a geo could put a small sample through a local mass spectrometer to identify the composition but they won't release any composition/grade without assays.

The clues for PIs will be:
Core photo's the more the better
Possibly core under UV light can be quite distinctive
Might say they found XXX meters if its a continuous & distinct rock formation
Expedited assays = good, no mention of assays (i1) probably not so good
BT's body language/excitement level although remember TA2DD002 (KSZ) which was important enough to warrant an out of hours RNS and presentation but we've still not had the results after 9 months.
Drilling much deeper than expected, can either mean the modelling didn't match the core, geos following a hunch (like TA2) and they have multiple targets from AMT etc, or they found something and want to maximise the amount of core/data.