Member Info for Rocktapper

Apart from people's statements here about the geology and mineralisation which are very far off the mark, PIs should be more concerned about what feels like a share price manipulation to maintain the sp less than 3p despite clearly very encouraging news. Even despite the political uncertainty in Zambia and the ebola and other problems in the DRC, the current sp in no way represents the existing or potential asset value of the company IMHO. Politicians come and go, usually as a result of their own policies so medium to long term view is needed. But then that could be said for any junior explorer / miner.

But still can't wait until they bang a couple of holes into Cheyeza Central!

It's from 1st May 2019 but I hadn't seen this posted here:

https://www.proactiveinvestors.com/companies/news/219487/skinbiotherapeutics-makes-progress-with-skinbiotix-platform-219487.html

One had hoped that now that the human trials provide scientific backing to the product's effacity, that commerical negotiations would be on-going. Two months now and no news - particularly as one might expect the new CEO to want to make his mark? Even a 'gentle' progress report could provide some reassurance!

I don't wish to be rude but these deposits are not VMS. Check this reference as a summary example https://eprints.utas.edu.au/755/

Have a look at the coordinates given in G. E. Cheyeza East appears to have a large area of brown oxide-rich soils some of which look like gossans. Cheyeza Central has the long low outcrop /subcrop. The patches of white, bluey white and cream to orange colours could be alteration close to mineralisation.
In the maps showing the geochemistry results, the anomalies tcould be interpreted as occurring along the outer edges of a NE-SW oriented sub-basin or fold which widens to the southwest. The northern edge appears less well defined.
Whatever, the interpretation, I am really optimistic for the results.

Whilst I have my questions regarding the use of portable XRF as giving 'definitive' soil sampling results versus data produced from assaying soil samples from 'B horizon' soils (I'm still seeking a second opinion on this), it's worth noting a couple of things that can be seen on Google Earth and other satellite imagery for the Cheyeza East and Central anomaly areas. You can get the coordinates from the maps presented in the RNS and they are in WGS84 UTM 35L so can be used to locate yourself. Cheyeza East is centred roughly at 278783.00 m E 8661999.00 m S; Cheyeza Central is centred on 275466.00 m E 8661591.00 m S. I have access to ESRI imagery which is processed slightly differently to Google but seems to highlight brown (iron) oxides in the soils around Cheyeza East and could represent gossans from mineralisation below. The rivers draining the area and slopes have potential to disperse the anomaly which may expalin why it is so wide. However, it is clear that close to the river west of C.E. and S. of C.C. there is cleared ground possibly as a result of flooding or possibly plants are not able to grow there due to high metal concentrations in the soil. However, more striking, is the apparent low outcrop at C.C. This strikes NW-SE, runs for approximately 1200m and is exposed as being up to 150m wide - although its true thickness is likely to be much less. On Google this shows as patches of ground with a dark purply blue tinge. On ESRI imagery it is bright blue and suggests the possibility of significant alteration / secondary copper oxide mineralisation at surface! The images appear to have been taken at wetter and dryer times in the year respecitvely. However, the geochemical map supplied by ARCM only shows a bullseye anomaly at the south-eastern end of this outcrop! I was going to include a back of a fag packet guess at the possible value of copper based on measurements of the outcrop and assumed concentrations of copper present but it's far too misleading! Let's just say that if they end up drilling at these locations, the results should be very interesting. And they won't necessarily need to drill 400m long holes either in this first stage.

I know what you are saying is correct but at the end of the day, his shareholding is also there to make him wealthier! I am down almost 33k and so am wondering when and where this will all end. A change of strategy and BOD is really required - and soon.

Anyone trying to remove the bod at kdr would be well advised to pay heed to the shenanigans that went on over here. It already looks like the suitors are failing on the first hurdle by not following the correct procedures. To avoid the technicalities that Conroy seems to win on, anybody taking the bod on has to carefully read each company's constitution which in the case of cgnr if I recall is quite cleverly worded and requires following to the letter to be able to legitimately make a claim / win. You'd think that by now, Prof Conroy might take the hint though!

To me, on top of all the nonsense with Conroy which the market sees through, the overall strategy is wrong. If they were to just concentrate on increasing and upgrading the Clontibret 'resources' into measured and indicated resources from which they could derive a mineable reserve, they would then have a defined asset. Assuming that this can be done!

If they concentrated on even just starting off a small mine and managed to convert the resources to reserves of 500k Oz, this might generate a small, relatively low-cost operation with a say 5 - 7 year mine life. The money from that could go to help pay for exploration on the other anomalies and eventually possibly allow for development of other mines. IMHO, the notion that there is an exploration target of 8.8 M Oz of gold is somewhat fanciful and the methodology behind the statement is somewhat dubious.

It should be about keeping things relatively simple.

Another aspect is the antimony mine. The drilling revealed gold 30m below the existing mine. Excellent opportunity to carry out some small scale development, tunnel down to that level and explore the geology and structure whilst looking like you are actually doing something at the same time. But is that being done? No!

Popping a few shallow holes in lots of anomalies isn't going to get enough information together to sell a coherent story to a potential major investor. A nice proven up reserve, environmental studies and planning permission with potential to expand on that reserve would stand more chance.

If at the end of the day, there isn't going to be anything financially feasible, they should be walking away from it all and announcing a new strategy - like finding gold projects in other countries in Europe or say, Latin America.

Us PI-ons really want to see a return on our investment. Conroy doesn't seem to understand this point at all!

The Zambian and Congolese copper deposits are part of the Central African copperbelt and are sediment-hosted stratabound copper deposits, not generally directly related to porphyry copper deposits.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=zambian+copperbelt+geology

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284791953_A_new_look_at_the_geology_of_the_Zambian_Copperbelt

Having seen the ARC Twitter posts, it is easy to see the Cheyeza West copper-in-soil anomaly being very large. The company is going to be doing work to better define this because they know that copper is highly mobile in certain soils and because other aspects such as terrain, ground and surface water dispersion and soil / water pH can contribute to copper dispersion. The need is clear to refine the copper anomalies with tighter spaced lines and to better establish the correlation with the EM anomalies before drilling can take place - rather than randomly popping drill holes into an EM anomaly. What is clear though, is that to create a copper-in-soil anomaly of the size of Cheyeza West, there is likely to be notable source of the copper.

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/stocktube/12926/skinbiotherapeutics--cath-o-neill--thrilled--with-human-study-data-for-skin-cream-12926.html

It certainly does. I'm stuck here since the Ortac days and am just shy of £38k down right now. I need an SP of 11p to break even! Can't afford to average down either. I thought with new management things would improve and they did for a while but with 'external forces' bearing down, it's not going to be a rapid return.
I think you are right - they have to sit in the bottom drawer.

Yes, again I agree. There is certainly some form of manipulation going on.

I agree.
The daily list of shorted companies can be found at:
https://www.fca.org.uk/markets/short-selling/notification-and-disclosure-net-short-positions
Halfway down on the right hand side there should be a link to the daily list which loads up as an Excel spreadsheet.

There's also a specific website that may not be related to the FCA: https://shorttracker.co.uk/daily/

Hope that helps?

It's not on the FCA shorts list for 11th April.

It's good news but in an early-stage exploration-sense. I think the market probably sees the appearance that the programme seems to have taken a step 'backwards' to look at more anomalies rather than purely focusing on taking Kalaba forward? It's worth considering that If the new anomalies are in fact bigger than Kalaba, then this is probably a good strategy: where Kalaba might actually end up as a satellite to a much bigger project.

I'd still like to hear something positive for DRC and Slovakia.....

I wonder whether, if ARCM release some really bad news, the share price would go shooting up?!

Was it really the same person who bought 57,325 shares at 13:22:48 for 6.9p and then sold them at 13:47:34 for 8.25p? It looks like a bit of a shocking manipulation...

By the looks of it, someone's playing around with buys and sells to see how the price moves...

The block model is 'simply' (it's not simple at all!) a model of the geology, grade and tonnage across the (oxide) deposit. Following drilling / sampling, a block model is created to provide an estimate of the grade and tonnages (and other phyiscal and chemical characteristics) of the potential material to be mined. Statistical modelling as part of the block model is used to estimate grades and tonnages (etc.) for the volumes between the known information of each drill hole. The block model is so known because it refers to the division of the geological and / potential ore body into 'blocks' which eventually become the mining blocks upon which the initial mine plan will be based. The dimensions of the blocks can be assigned statistically or through selection based on testing the most appropriate mining methods and the known dimensions of the body. Each mine block is assigned parameters which include geology, grade, volume, tonnage (etc.) and which are based on the geological and geostatistical modelling. These characteristics are then used to develop a mine plan and schedule as the mill / processing plant will have been designed around certain grade and material input considerations.

All of the above is then used to generate the estimates for the potential costs of mining and processing. The whole process being iterative until (if at all!) the project appears to be sufficiently cash positive and a suitable level of Internal Rate of Return is reached.

Hence in the RNS, what ARCM are saying is that they now need to review the block model in order to establish the most appropriate mine plan and schedule to mine the oxide (near surface) material (and which will provide the correct quality and grade for the plant).

However, I think it is important to take into account the statement by NvS at the end which provides the 'bigger picture' view of the whole issue...The demonstration plant appears to satisfy licencing and other conditions rather than representing the eventual plant for a major deposit / mine.

If one assumes a price obtained for the plant's concentrate of US$ 6000 / t copper (less than current Cu price to take into account processing costs etc.), the stated 10,000 tonne stockpile at 2% copper can be assumed to represent 200 tonnes of Cu, producing a sale price of around US$ 1.2 million. No cobalt grade was given...
A potentially nice contribution to the coffers!