Member Info for notrader

News - you are wrong. He never mentioned Apollo in his first post in relation to Zipa. He also said that although Zipa showed no significant mineralisation, he felt if they had drilled in another direction, it might be different. He tried to explain to you that Apollo might be connected to Zipa but was much closer aligned geologically to targets slightly further West. Nowhere did he say Apollo was a dud. That is your inference.

news - "Isnt Strudel and Bamps21 saying that Apollo [ARV] will turn up nada just due to GGP's ZIPA."

Reading Bamp's post I can say that is not my take. He posted "At the moment it doesn’t look as though Havieron is connected northwards, needs more exploration." This is because, as he says, Zipa which lies directly between Hav and Atlas, shows little mineralisation.

Separately, he says "I’m still very hopeful on Apollo" and "Pad 7 (Apollo hole 7) with similar geology to HAD005 (still one of Ggp best holes) looks very promising" This directly contradicts your inference that "what you are saying is that ZIPA [Newcrest-GGP] has turned out with "NO SIGNIFICANT MINERALISATION" means that a/c to your HYPOTHESIS, then
APOLLO HOLE 7 WILL BE ALSO NADA based on your thinking as above this para."

How you can read his original post and think he is dissing ARV is beyond my understanding.

Cela - nothing that Bamps has posted here (or elsewhere) contradicts what ARV has announced. He si a highly respected poster on the GGP board - perhaps you could look at some of his posting history going back a few years to see the kind of thing he contributes. I don't know him personally, but he is friendly with PaddyGall and for 'news' to insinuate they disagree on ARV is ridiculous. I, and I believe Bamps and most others in GGP, are very interested in what happens at Apollo, because of the 'nearology' with our tenement.

Good luck to all ARV'rs

Bamps - re your post on pre-production ore extraction, I posted this last October

"My feeling is that it's about the definition of 'first ore'. I don't know enough about mining regs, particularly in Oz, but I suspect they cannot 'mine' ore until licensed to do so by the authorities. Perhaps others can clarify. I think there will be a process - NCM make the formal decision to mine, apply for a permit to mine and no doubt other bits of paper from the authorities (eg environmental). Only then can they officially begin commercial mining operations.

However, Havieron is already unusual in that work on the decline has begun well in advance of the official decision to mine (still in the 'exploratory phase and therefore not included in Capex costs) and I expect that once they reach the ore body, they will begin to extract ore. They can classify this as still 'exploratory' and necessary for testing the systems and checking compatibility with the Telfer equipment. Is there a limit to how much they can extract for this purpose? Perhaps they cannot sell the product until licensed? But it is very likely that there will be gold produced before the official first ore."

Nobody had any comment on it then, interested if anyone thinks my assumptions are valid.

Shorts there very upset.

pjh - "They're literally telling you that their 25p target price is based on their DCF from February 2021, with modifications"

Why would they do that when they produced an updated DCF in Oct 21?

Interesting that you have access to that note when it's not accessible through the H&P website.

petejh - " It's staring you in the face"

You obviously don't know, or deliberately ignore, the difference between producing 20mtpa of ore p/a and producing 21moz of gold.

thelearner - no idea why I wrote that! I meant to say that during the farm-in NCM was 'earning' %ages through project expenditure.

thelearner - I posted about this a few weeks ago. My guess is that 'farm-in' is related to NCM making payments to GGP for increased %ages. Therefore, I assume the 'farm-in' period lasts until the 5% issue is settled. Then it becomes purely a joint venture, with GGP having either 25% or 30%.

In the revised JV RNS (Nov 30 2020), the part about the non-JV blocks is not included. There is specific mention of first rights over Scally. Whether the non-JV blocks are no longer part of the agreement, or just not mentioned i the RNS, we can't know.

Tig - I'm with H&L and I have found that when a company sends shareholders special notices, classified as 'corporate action' they will send you an notification email. You can access the relevant info by logging in and see what, if anything, you need to do and how to do it. This would include takeover bids.

Tymers - "I expect JPM to put the squeeze on again"

That's great news! With your track record, if you say that's what'll happen, it's almost certain to be the opposite.

The fact remains that Haverion cannot yet be classed as a Tier 1 asset, as Hydro stated.

RNS p7 - "This release documents an update prepared solely by Greatland to the Resources and Reserves
documented in the Stage 1 PFS and has not been reviewed by Newcrest."

L-A - the extract you quote is from the original JV RNS. I agree it's confusing that the 2 terms are used, but obviously they are different things. My guess is that 'farm-in' is related to NCM making payments to GGP for increased %ages. Therefore, I assume the 'farm-in' period lasts until the 5% issue is settled. Then it becomes purely a joint venture.

In the revised JV RNS, the part about the non-JV blocks is not included. There is specific mention of first rights over Scally. Whether the non-JV blocks are no longer part of the agreement, or just not mentioned i the RNS, we can't know.

I understand this is your usual posting group. Why have you spammed 10 different boards with an irrelevant and unwanted ramp?

And JB, when sharesmagazine [https://www.sharesmagazine.co.uk/article/crest-of-a-wave] writes "By far the most common way of holding shares is through a stockbroker’s nominee account. The shares are registered in the name of a stockbroker but you have beneficial ownership of them." you can totally ignore the part which says the shares are registered in the name of the stockbroker? Not just my opinion. Hope you come back after you find out what GGP can actually provide.

JB - yesterday we were "debating" and it was obvious we disagreed. You accused me of posting opinions I did not really believe. To me, that would mean I was lying.

"I welcome being challenged" - but when someone puts an opposing view you call them a liar and tell them they don't really believe what they're posting.

Joe - perhaps you should contact this company in 'Farham' and ask them for their list of all GGP shareholders and see what they say.