Member Info for schlemiel

Newcrest. Lenigas. The latter is IRRELEVANT

It hit 7p on Friday and reversed aggressively back to upper 7's...still decent buying interest here but when you have big hitters like Beetham playing the stock with their deep pockets is hardly surprising that volatility becomes the order of the day...it's a great stock to trade I suppose

ISA safe - I need around 15-17p to get me over £90k...I'll be happy with that and my life and those I care for will change immeasurably for the better.

With £90k cash I can work wonders...

thelearner - yes, you're right fella. GGP's been an amazing vehicle of value creation and that value creation from the drill bit has further to go when monetisation kicks in

I'm also in FOG (o/t apologies) and it's in exactly the same scenario as is GGP. Both partnering huge aussie companies, both sat on huge discoveries, both holding patient for monetisation to happen...

GGP's 30% @ FMV ( as distinct to the pennies Newcrest have paid for their 70%) is cash in the bank and worth much more than GGP's market capitalisation. Throw in the cash, cash to come from warrants and our other highly prospective licences (and no doubt more JV's to come) and I'd say this company's pretty much got decent upside...

You won't learn much about the fundamental value of GGP by reading the balance sheet and P & L accounts. The value is out there, deep below the desert of Western Australia...

'over 400m in length, up to 150m wide and up to 600m'

over = in excess of
up to = limit reached and no more

April 30th

DATAROOM

Newcrest success paves way for opportunity
Supplied Editorial AAP FINAL

Newcrest Mining raised more than it needed for the $US460 million purchase of the royalty stream from Lundin Gold’s Fruta del Norte project.

By BRIDGET CARTER

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/dataroom

Raised : US$640m
FDN royalty financing facility : US$460m

'The current intention of both parties is, that subject to a positive Feasibility Study outcome, the ore from the proposed Havieron Joint Venture will be toll processed at Newcrest’s Telfer Gold Mine (“Telfer”), which sits approximately 45km to the west of Havieron, delivering material economic and operational benefits for both parties. These include:

- lower upfront capital costs (no requirement to build a new processing plant);

- ability to leverage all existing infrastructure at Telfer (roads, airport, power, water);

- reduced time to production and first cash flows; and

- potential for a significantly higher net present value for the project than if a new processing plant and supporting infrastructure was required.'

-

Two observations -

1. 'the current intention of both parties'. 'Current' is in March 2019 before both parties realise what was contained within at Havieron. The date today is 2 April 2020, 12 months hence and a gold-copper asset of world class status. The 'current intention' is now an historical aberration

2. No reference to how GGP will finance its portion (25% after the 5% sale at FMV) of capex to bring havieron into production

can you explain the relevance of this mate for those with a brain the size of a peanut?

cheers

tymers -

Why would Newcrest sacrifice 30% of all the profit and cash-flow from a high grade, long life mine such as Havieron? I don't get it. PRIM has already stated the same opinion. From a commercial point of view I cannot see what role GGP has to play in both the development and the operating of Havieron once in production. I must be missing something

Do you know what really intrigues me? Why have Newcrest not taken an equity stake in GGP in the way they have with SOLG and Antipa?

If only we had a spy on the inside

regarding last week. I believe what we saw was the now classic 'sell on news' phenomena rather than anything to do with the contents of the actual news (exploration update) itself

thelearner - yes, all costs are therefore capitalised and the target spend refers to capex spend...cheers

kieffy

yes, that's the point I was trying to make but failed miserably. It's the actual events as they take place through the passage of time rather than the legal agreement that sets out the various stages of the agreement itself which is of course a legacy document composed in an office many months ago now

real time developments are what interest me and exercise my tiny intellect

thelearner

By the way, these questions aren't directed at you fella. Just throwing out ideas in response

'they must spend'. How is this determined and over what timescale? Is this OPEX spend or CAPEX spend? How accurate is this 'spend' measurement? Does it include 'forecasted' spend or actual expenditure of real cash?

I suspect I am 'over thinking' this and trying to cover angles that don't require coverage..

I've just seen Paddy Gall's post regarding the possible capital cost of a decline for Havieron of $28m or thereabouts. The same for Red Chris? Which leaves Newcrest will a decent wad left over and an increase in cashflow from Fruta Del Norte after last week's news

What is intriguing is why would they dilute through a placing when they have available hefty credit facilities?

On Friday, Biswas said Newcrest was entering a 'growth phase'. I have no idea what he meant by that cos production is falling badly. They certainly need new reserves to feed future production growth and not 'bought in' either which is expensive as the growth's already been extracted to a degree by the previous owner

'just sent'

It's funny you should ask that cos I've just Denver Harris (Sandstorm) an email about the capital cost of the proposed decline at Havieron and another question about the upping of drilling to +80k mtrs.

He might not reply but then he might as Sandstorm is partially involved with Antipa and therefore does have both an indirect and direct interest in events at Havieron and Newcrest

Mind-blowing fellas, mind-blowing

Images from space to Google, to Paddy to LSE to us all and all in a few clicks

It just shows how far we've come when a member of the general public complains about the quality of the images being sent back to Earth by a satellite!! LOL

Growing up in the late 70's, early 80's the idea of receiving images onto a PC screen from a satellite buzzing around planet earth was utterly inconceivable. Today, people complain about it

It's not a dig at you ProfQ, by the way but an indication of just how far we have come, well, certainly in scientific and technological terms anyway.