Member Info for observer842

lol @Frankie! @Ivy you say no recent drilling. We never heard the results from previous drilling. imv if the BoD are willing to let the licence lapse it's because the results were never that good. So no ta da @Frankie only ta ra.

We need to do more to spread the word about Amapa. If the WH Ireland report correctly captures the essence of the project, just how valuable it could prove to us, we should be sending it to all and sundry. Unless of course those who believe are happy to continue to buy at the current share price from the disbelievers. Ahem. lol!

It's quite sad news about Greenland. I've spent a fair amount of my time exploring this asset in multiple senses of the word. Though we've still got Yangibana. Any updates on this?

Thanks for the updates @Barksy. I'm looking forward to others! If we are staying on AIM might be worth a comparison with other AIM Iron Ore companies? I've looked at ZIOC in the past. Any others worthy of comparison? So far KDNC 1. Others 0. IMHO!

@News ....sorry to be the second to break it to you but I refer you to Ivy's 11:47 one liner: "will almost certainly be abandoned"

lol @Frankie. It's worth your time searching for and reading about "keyboard shortcuts". Here's the first link: https://www.computerhope.com/shortcut.htm have a play, you'll save time in the long run! ;-)

It's in the RNS @Ivy:

===[
The beneficiation plant consists of a crushing circuit followed by screening, flotation, thickener and filtering to produce a 65% Fe Pellet Feed and a 62% Fe Spiral Concentrate.

The current mine plan would mean that the Amapá Project would produce at steady-state production an estimated 4.4 Mt of 65% Fe and 0.9 Mt of 62% Fe per annum. Currently steady-state production is expected to be reached in 2024.
]===

But that's after we've brought the plant back on line.

@Ivy, That's the plan when the plant is in production, but the RNS states that the stockpiles are approximately 62% grade, and @$80/t is forecast to net us $60m.

Perhaps I should just let what you say go unchallenged - but I presume you (and others) would rather I said what I believe to be the case - and if it is not, or there are typos in the RNS @Kiran better clarify pronto ;-)

If this is sent, then it's long lines that LSE isn't liking at the moment. I had to split the above paragraph into two as it wouldn't send as one.

Are you sure @ivybush? RNS: "An independent survey of these stockpiles indicates some 1.39 Mt (+/- 10%) of iron ore in three stockpiles with an average Fe grade of 62.12% (+/ 10%), which based a US$80 per tonne of 62% Fe would net Amapá a forecast US$60 million net of costs."

I'll be very surprised if we see cash flow from the sale of the iron ore stocks leave the JV in KDNC's direction. "It is estimated that these stockpiles have a net realisable value of approximately US$ 60 million, which will be reinvested in the restart of the Amapá Project.". But I wasn't at the AGM - was this hinted at?

Tax situation on this $60m?

If you can say more on the $3.5m that would be great. "Cadence's next stage of investment will be a further investment of US$3.5 million on the grant of all operational and environmental licenses for the Amapá Project, at which point Cadence will own 27%.". Can we raise that after the granting of these licenses?

Risk free sounds great. Though the $2.5m is released after next milestone, not after all milestones. I suspect the market will need more reassuring on where that $3.5m is coming from. Presumably if you (and others?) have been persuaded that the majority of this won't be coming from a placing then current SP must look attractive?

All good stuff @Ivybush - keep the one liners coming. I presumed a strategic investor would be involved for the CapEx, but good to hear. Didn't know about the repayment of our $6m @18% coupon. Though it does makes sense that what the JV partners invest in the JV they get back. Any chance of us seeing the agreement?

re the $3.5m. That's interesting news, but I would have thought that if the BoD said "majority of funding from debt" that this would be related to the many millions of the CapEx of the project, not our $3.5m contribution. Can anyone else who was there corroborate? ps. I can't post long either.

That's good to hear @Ivybush - had we not stopped BCN when we did I dread to think what terms we would have been lumped with.

Wow. 1hr 15mins discussion on Amapa!? I'm looking forward to all you and anyone who was there have to say. Of all the weekends for LSE to play up. lol. Although perhaps it's in your interests to keep quiet until you've all made your plays first thing Monday morning? ;-)

:-)

@Barksy I'd say if you get a chance to have a chat with @Kiran it's probably worth trying to get the message across to him that on AIM any mention or expectations of a placing results in a sinking share price no matter how good the prospects are for the company. If he truly has the interests of existing shareholders at heart he needs to be made aware of this, as this point can't be emphasised strongly enough IMHO. if institutions want in to what we've got, and he has indicated that they do, then let's see some on market buying into the high single digit percentages to demonstrate their commitment to this share before we offer them a larger in via an off market placing, same goes for the BoD. That's how I'd play this out based on the potential I see in Amapa.

Ob.

I thought you've got those covered @Barksy! ;-)

@Frankie, a few for you to ask related to our older projects:

Q: In August 2016 WH Ireland estimated a risked £10.6m contribution to their target price for our 100% owned Greenland licences. In May 2017 they estimated a risked £12.3m contribution to their target price. Since then we have retained just one of the licences from which no exploration results have been announced to the market. What value does the BoD place on this licence today and what sort of upside do the BoD envisage should our neighbour successfully commence production?

Q: In August 2016 and May 2017 WH Ireland estimated a risked £6.1m contribution to their target price for our 30% owned Yangibana licences. What value does the BoD place on these licence today and how much might they be worth when the project is fully derisked at first production?

Q: Given the aforementioned internal valuations of our Yangibana and Greenland licences, might it not be in the interests of existing shareholders that we realise some of this value to fund newer projects such as Amapa, rather than seeking to raise funds through other avenues such as a discounted share placing?

@Frankie - Feel free to ignore as you didn't ask me to provide you these questions, I just thought you might be feeling left out! LoL. :-)

Ob.