Member Info for Rocktapper

Yes, you could be right. It's undervalued on paper against the potential resources, for sure. I think the market knows the history of the company though and the treacle-like speed at which progress has been made! Nevertheless, if there is something going on in the background such as a takeover, I'll still need to see over 30p per share to break even which is a hangover from pre-consolidation times! Hence, my desire to see / hear of an effective plan to get this to development.

Yes, I take your point and understand how the planning system works. It would be nice to have confirmation from the BoD though. It's the smallest technicalities that can often cause a hiccup. But I don't want to put a complete downer on things and my main concern is that at least the MAST projects come through in the first instance. I'm hoping that the BoD have all bases covered in reality.

lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNoO5UdEGCY
(Just joking!)

Real value might start to be added if the CGNR preliminary economic assessment (PEA) for Clontibret was updated for additional drilling that has taken place since the original together with updated current costs and metal prices. It would also help to understand what categories the 500 k Oz 'Jorc resource' are actually placed into. All this in light of September's 'new' strategy to start a mine at Clontibret. Demonstration that a full scoping study has been started and consultation with the land-owners and planning authorities perhaps? Identification of work that still needs to be done to upgrade the resource into reserves?
Some of this work may not need to cost much but would demonstrate a pathway to the mine development that we are told is being aimed for.
In the meantime, there's been several weeks of share price manipulation to contend with before (and I am speculating) a cash raise! But with no real announcement of the 'planned' way forward.

I am still trying too figure out how they are going to get Bordersley up and running in the remaining 8 weeks of Q1 when they still haven't apparently had a discharge of the planning conditions for what I have been assuming are their planning permissions. I know the development is basically about dragging a couple of prefabricated generators onto a site and building a couple of ancilliary buildings then plugging it all in to the gas and electricity grid but if they haven't discharged the conditions (which are easy to do) then technically they would be in breach of their permission.
Whilst I continue to hold out hope for KIBO and its projects in the longer term and despite the current anti-coal 'climate', these are simple points which we're not being told about but which could have an impact on that Q1 2020 commissioning target. But then most targets seem to get missed! I'm still down a huge sum here, like most, so want to see some more evidence from the BoD and LC that they can actually get a project into production and that there may even just be a 'break even' let alone profit in this share.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrncYvCr3BM

Stulaw, I agree with you on the need to finding a new mine or a mine expansion. It would be good to hear that the company is actively seeking new licences covering kimberlite-prospective ground close to the existing property or even exploring the existing property or depth continuation of the known kimberlites. However, that medium to long-term strategy has not been mentioned as far as I'm aware.

The RNS towards the end states the inferred resource remaining in the ground at present is around 367,000 carats. If they are getting around US$410 per carat in sales and a cost of production of around US$275 (and decreasing!), this suggests the estimated value of the (mined + processed) resource is around US$ 49.5 million. That's a little under £38 million at present or around £11.64 a share! More importantly, if the operation stabilisies and continues to run in profit over the next couple of quarters to a year, when are they going to start paying a dividend?!

Again, I am flattered. I've not had a chance to have a proper look at the new data but will in due course and will provide some form of (humble) opinion!

It's worth looking at the number of shares bought and sold since Friday. Up until 13.34 today, around 3.1% of the stock had been bought and 2.88% sold. In other words, very little net buying is shifting the SP (as has often historically been the case here). I'll let others now comment on what might be going on!

appears to be being manipulated up and maintained by series of generally around £500 buys (with the occasional larger trade) so the voumes are kept up. Been going on since Friday. Someone's got a budget to be playing around. I can only imagine it's to get the SP up ahead of a raising?! If only 'whoever' would get it to 30p !

by the first main paragraph of today's RNS:
"Kibo Mining plc (AIM: KIBO; AltX: KBO), the multi-asset Tanzania focused energy and resource company, ...."
With the mention of 'multi-asset Tanzania focused ", either: the person writing the RNS has no idea that Tanzania has slipped down Kibo's own league table of power projects to third place (with its other African project in Mozambique and the UK's Bordersley taking first and second place respectively) (see Table 1 of 18th December RNS) or 'something is afoot'!

What's it to be?!
Answers on a postcard!

Actually, I'll correct myself, many of the sells were before the 11am start...we'll have to wait and see if the price picks up again...

Makes you wonder what is being said at the AGM! I was going to go but decided not to. Should have gone!

It would seem from the RNS that votes made for passing the resolutions totalled less than half the total of shares making up CGNR. In other words, it would appear that probably only Conroy and the other directors / friends voted. I must check with my share trading account as to whether they still send the forms back for the AGMs!
The resolutions passed seem to suggest there's a 'free rein' granted on issuing more shares so probably expect further dilution in coming days, weeks ,months.
I've only just forced myself to read the Annual Report and seen the salaries and fees. Given that the exploration spend was only around twice Conroy's salary, it all makes me feel even sicker than I was before. It might be me being affected by "seasonally affected disorder", but I really don't see how this pile of steaming proverbial will ever repay the stupid amount of money I've sadly invested in it.
As ever, I live in hope to be proven wrong!

Continued from 1/2:

Overall then, I continue to be hopeful for the results and that a small mine can be (quickly) developed at Cheyeza (including the other anomalies) which will help fund further exploration / development elsewhere. As I have said before, I need a share price of 11p (which stems from the Ortac days) to start to see a return on my investment so there is some way to go. I am also hopeful that continuing the work will allow ARCM to locate any sulphide mineralisation which might be the source of the ?secondary oxides. Any sulphide mineralisation located is likely to be lower grade but there may be more of it.

I would be disappointed if ARC’s strategy for its Zambian copper projects was to sell up at a certain point without getting to the mine development stage (either alone or through further JVs) but then that’s just my personal opinion / position as someone who wishes to see mines developed.

In summary,
I continue to be very encouraged by the grades and thicknesses being encountered in the drill holes;

I wish they would publish the maps showing the most recent drill hole locations so investors can better understand the current extent (strike length / area) of the drilling coverage and so we can be assured that drilling isn’t just focusing on the known higher grade core in order to produce high grade results and that drilling is showing a genuine continuation / extension of the high grade core in the SE and NW directions as stated in the recent RNS;

ARCM should be in a position to provide some form of ‘maiden’ inferred resource estimate for Cheyeza East relatively soon to allow them and us to get a feel for the economics;

I am optimistic for good results from the other anomalies being tested when they eventually come through.

The current share price doesn’t really reflect the current or potential value of the projects to the company.

I hope that helps a little?!

I’m afraid I am providing a cautious response / comment because I believe at the moment it continues to be relatively early days for ARC’s exploration project at Cheyeza East.

I have recently carried out my own estimate for the potential order of magnitude of resources at Cheyeza East. There are severe limits to this though because one only has the grade intersections to go on from the RNS publications. However, as ARCM have stopped publishing maps with the drill hole locations (for obvious reasons), it’s become impossible to add to and further estimate any additional magnitude of resources which might be estimated using the results of the last two RNS publications.

My ‘back of an envelope- level’ estimate of tonnage and contained copper content was certainly very encouraging. If the in-the-ground value alone was assigned to the ‘resource’, it would result in a potential asset value which should theoretically result in a share price / market capital of a couple of times the current value. However, I don’t wish to publish anything because the values would be inaccurate and grossly misleading given the estimation methods and lack of information available.

The bottom line for me at present is that, based on the drilling and information to date, there seems to be potential for a small, low-cost shallow open pit copper oxide mining operation. I’m therefore, in agreement with most of what has been published so far by the BoD in their RNS and interviews.

I continue to be a little bit puzzled as to why the ARCM share price cannot seem to lift and sustain itself above the 3p mark. There are obviously pros for the company in that the Zambian project s are extremely encouraging and that they have literally only just scratched the surface of the potential for the licence areas. However, I then consider that ARCM only own percentages of the projects / licences and so do not have 100% ownership of any of the licences.

I also have to question the recent deals done for Casa and Sturec (and previously Andiamo). It is notoriously difficult to value exploration and development projects (there are a numerous publications on the issue). I see the deals as not having or unlikely to realise the projects’ full monetary value for the company, although to be fair, in all these cases, ARCM do have to contend with both the current relatively poor mining investment market conditions and the inherent risk of the locations of the projects.

Continued......

I'm flattered! I'll try to provide a response / comment asap.

It's not. There are conditions (pre-commencement and post-commencemt) on the approval document which state that the development shouldn't commence until certain conditions have been met (mainly with respect to design). If a simple RNS was released to state that all planning approvals are in place and the conditions have been met and discharged then to me, that would be 'shovel ready'. It's not clear that the work has been carried out to get the conditions discharged. Hence, if not, there may be potential for delay. None of the conditions appear onerous at all.
http://eplanning.idox.birmingham.gov.uk/publisher/mvc/listDocuments?identifier=Planning&reference=2018/08546/PA

One has to ask or wonder whether at that price per share, there is a planned 10:1 consolidation down the tracks? It seems like that would be the only way someone would accept that level of payment.
A further point: the planning application approval for Bordesley has conditions which need to be complied with and approved by Birmingham City Council before the development commences. I think it would be beneficial to us long-suffering shareholders to know from LC whether the revisions required in the conditions have been carried out and approved by B.C.C. because getting the necessary approvals from local authorities, although not necessarily a problem - and often only a formality - can nevertheless have the potential to delay things. Much play is made of finding the right EPC contractors and getting the financing in place to see the project through but if you haven't got the fundamental agreement sorted with the L.A. to start then you're stuffed!

Yesterday's movement / trading was down to either someone being in on some useful information or else them having their monthly mess around with the SP to see how much it jumps up or down on the whim of a bit of trading.
Has anyone been 'lucky' enough to get a cheap flight to Dublin to attend the 'farce' - I mean AGM - next week?