Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
When asked about the cross listing, SD quotes from the Sunday Roast interview:
"The September quarter strats from 1 July, my sense is kinda that it's mid quarter because it's a bit of a process"
"It's somewhat imminent"
ATB RA
Interesting discussion this morning about the "value" of Telfer.
While the Telfer site is shown on NCM's book carrying a huge financial burden, this is because they anticipated that it was about to be decommissioned and had huge reconstitution costs.
As a complete entity, Telfer has a small or negative true value. However, break it down into constituent parts:
Hole in the ground: Huge reconstitution costs and very little positive value to be made.
Processing plant: Smaller reconstitution costs and more value if you can identify a source of ore.
Accommodation: Smaller reconstitution costs and value if you should need to accommodate a workforce.
Runway: Smaller reconstitution costs but value should you need to fly in people and equipment.
So, yes - Telfer has significant value for the plant, accommodation and Runway but a huge financial burden for the hole in the ground. What is the true value of Telfer and what is the most economic solution for the processing of Havieron Ore over the next 12-40 years when transportation of ore is factored into the equation?
That's one for the accountants and business owners to determine.
MrEMC2 said "What about the 5%?"
From my prevoius post:
"The previous MRE was issued for a very clear business reason and it would not surprise me if SD had not cleared/advised NCM of his intentions prior to releasing it in order to give them the opportunity to release their own as the JV manager. He has no real business reason that he could present to NCM to release one at the moment."
ATB RA
I'm sorry Tiggerman but I have to agree with Dip and Bamps on ths matter regarding GGP releasing our own MRE.
In addition to a new MRE possibly working against us in any negotiations that may be happening around Telfer, SD has said on many occasions that he recognises that NCM are managing the Havieron project and the timing of releases is at their choice, he has also said that he wishes to respect them and the relationship........for good reason.
From yesterday's RNSs, it is clear that SD and his team have been negotiating quite a few big deals with some of the bigger entities in the business. We do not know what other negotiations they are starting, in the middle of or concluding, however, it is clear to me that SD/GGP will want to be seen in those negotiations as a "good/reliable/compliant/trustworthy" entity with whom counter parties want to do business. He will not want to be seen as a an upstart that rocks the boat when things get difficult. You, as a businessman should be able to relate to this....would you do business with a person or entity that you do not trust?
SD wants to build long-term relationships and you do not do that by publicly breaking the rules of your current relationships.
The previous MRE was issued for a very clear business reason and it would not surprise me if SD had not cleared/advised NCM of his intentions prior to releasing it in order to give them the opportunity to release their own as the JV manager. He has no real business reason that he could present to NCM to release one at the moment.
ATB RA
Hi Fox_In_The_Box. Decline is supposed to be at a gradient of 1 in 7. Allowing for the top of the ore body to be 400M below surface would suggest that the decline should be 2800M. I've been advised by folks more informed than I that allowing for box cut etc a decline of 2600M is more likely.
Take a look at the attached link at some graphs and diagrams showing the progress to date. Unfortunately the last update did not give us brilliant info to plot a further point point but I'm sure that you'll get the idea.
Top of orebody could be as ealry as late April next year if progress has improved as much as we're led to believe.
ATB RA
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=479
Take a look here - Updated Daily by JC just after noon.
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=164
There are two trains at Telfer and they are only planning to use one for the Havieron Ore. There is ample capacity in that one train. Therefore, I guess that the other train could be configured and used for ore from another mine.
ATB RA.
5X5Croire said "You can protest all you like but, control of the company is now moving from PI's to Australian million/billionaires"
I say - Not necessarily a bad thing - take a look here at their track records.
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=537
You're correct Freddie, delaying the FS would inherently delay the DTM.
However, it is possible that (with improved progress on the decline), the top of the orebody could be reached as early as May/Jun next year.
Without a DTM, no licences to mine could be applied for and any extraction would likely be disallowed. I guess that NCM could continue to perform exploratory drilling from the bottom of the decline but delaying the FS/DTM would likely cause NCM issues in delaying first ore to Telfer.
AIMHO.
The shorters may struggle to close their positions at anything below 9p tomorrow as all the shares in the placing are not to be traded for 90 days. So the only shares that can be bought will be those that the MMs can buy. I certainly wont be selling mine and I suspect that most PIs who have held firm for the past 20 months will also hold. Risk off substantially, funded or route to funding either to or close to first pour. Maybe some who were sitting on the sidelines will now jump in.
Josh - I would anticipate that the Havieron JV will be treated as a single entity and will be charged for all ore processed at Telfer. Eventually the JV will generate income and profit which will be distributed to the JV partners as a 70/30 split.
Effectively, the Havieron JV is buying a service from Telfer, for which the owner of Telfer would expect to make a margin. It just so happens that the owner of Telfer is one of the partners of the Havieron JV.
Should we find anything at Scallywag, although unlikely (IMO) we could mine it ourselves and then contract with NCM to process it for a processing fee - that fee would include a margin for NCM.
I understood that the capex spend was made in proportion to their holding at the time of the spend. Will need to take a look at the RNS for more clarity.
Hi Bamps. Maybe a problem with your calcs. Much of the capex has already been spent....and in proportions where GGP were bearing a higher proportion than 25%.
For Crying Out Loud Loggy, you just need to Read 'em and Weep.
It's all Coming back to Me Now, this share is all Revved Up With No Place to Go as It Just Won'r Quit. You've got to be as Blind as A Bat not to realise that when she goes, it will be like a Bat Out of Hell. If Heaven can Wait, so can I so just LEt me Sleep on It.
ATB RA
Silverhorse - Great posts at 1143 and 1215.
Maybe you should change your name to Meatloaf as You Took the Words Right Out of My Mouth
https://www.ggpchat.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=442
Thanks also to Dip666
I remain very bullish on GGP. However that view is based upon my own research and certainly not the research by either of these publications. I agree that they may attract more PIs and suspect that thos who buy at these levels could do quite nicely.
I've also heard on the grapevine that these two publications were going to join forces - apparently the rebranding consultants had come up with the new name.........Simply Fool.
Lots of FUD going on at the mo with valued posters being banned. The board has now unfortunately been disrupted to a point of serving little value to the true investor. Main reason I do not post much here now.
I understand that there is an alternative though. The TG group is being made available to new folks, BR posted earlier, however his post appears to have been deleted.
I believe that the route to the TG group is via the g g p h e l p site with a link to Telegram from the home page.
Give it a go.
ATB RA
johnpwh. In the arbitration process, the independent expert will be required to choose one or other of the parties' valuations. After that NCM will have one month to decide whether to take the option or not. The IE would not be expected to come up with a third valuation. There was an interesting post yesterday that suggested that NCM may take the valutaion which is chosen by the IE and then attempt to negotiate from there. It's one very big game of poker, who will blink first.
strudel - great post, but there is one error. The 12 month time period is now moot as it referred only to the period within which NCM had to declare their intention to enter the 5% process. That was initiated last December and so the 12 months is now academic. The next time limit will follow the IE's decision as NCM will have one month to decide whether to take the option.
ATB - RA
Hi Redirons. Just remember that the independent expert is required to simply select which of the valuations is more correct, not determine a third valuation.
This is what drives the pressure on each party to actually present to the expert a "sensible" case for the valuation and not a silly lowball or hiball figure.
ATB RA
Hi Paddy. Thanks for your thoughts on the 5% negotiations where you suggested that Sandeep will want the 5% sorted before the MRE in late June. I agree with all points in your posts except the timing.
FWIW, I believe that the parties will, at some point in the next month, declare that the decision has been passed to the independent expert but that SB will offer a figure (outside of the arbitration process) very soon after the MRE is released.
We know that SB is under pressure from his shareholders not to make any more significant Capex and to pay more in dividends - consequently, he really needs a very clear foundation which he can use with his BoD and shareholders to justify further Capex - the MRE should hopefully do exactly that and make the decision to purchase the 5% a no-brainer - even at the higher levels demanded by GGP. The only debate in my mind is when does he make the offer?
Before MRE or after? In poker terms - does Sandeep wait for the turn of the River? Or does he call earlier?
Then we will see how good SD is as a poker player - will he accept the offer or raise the stakes and allow the independent expert to agree the full GGP valuation.
I guess that within all the debate over the 5%, there is also another debate to be had about full company buyout - but I don't think I'll go there.
AIMHO - RA