Member Info for ScipioAfricanus-

Did we really need a 6th separate post alerting us to the fact a LOI has been signed?

I take back my comment about being right on the news front... Posted it 5 mins after waking up and hadn't read the RNS yet, it's talking bout SA and not Ethiopia, looool. I need a coffee.

The share price is practically exactly where it was a month ago.... What are you talking about? It was sinking prior to that due to threats of license pulling and the fact that literally everything on the market was sinking...

Called it! Knew I was right to expect an update...

Also, I've only been involved in mining stocks for a. Couple of years, but both Tom Winnifrith and Zak Mir are clueless arses with worthless opinions. Every time I've seen them make a prediction (literally, dozens of times), I've made a note of it and made a note to see if they're correct in the future. They've been significantly wrong every time. Nobody should listen to them.

It's LOI, the same as an MOU, so no, it's not binding.

There are no legal requirements for either party to commit to anything in the LOI.

I haven't been following the company for more than a couple of weeks so I know nothing about any previous LOIs... Where they also related to green hydrogen, or the Thar / gold projects?

Hi all,

Could I please get an invite to the Telegram group as well? Obviously a shareholder.

Am I wrong in thinking we should have had some sort of news by now regarding the progress made after the June 29th signing of the umbrella agreement?

The Ethiopian govt were to have a progress review towards the end of July, and its now early August. Suppose it could always be delayed a few days, or the news could take a few days to come out on an RNS, or even the progress review could take a few days to complete with so many moving parts etc...

I dunno, I just kind of felt like we should have had some form of update by now, even if just a barebones one.

Maybe a case of no news is good news?...

@mike - so will I.

What's your point?

Lol they haven't even sent the cores off yet, assay results are going to be months in the future.

I imagine most sellers are selling because they're not convinced of the short - medium term prospects of the Thar coal project, to be honest. It's that which has prevented me from putting a decent chunk into this company.

However, I still wouldn't be selling despite that because I'm feeling pretty positive about the GH project.

Thanks for responses all, generated an interesting discussion. I'm agreed with all of you. Of course some people would agree to sell at 20/30/40/50p etc. but with the potential returns for a little more patience I really don't see how NCM could ever get enough of a vote share to take over GGP without it being 80-90p minimum, really.

Thank you Redtrader. Pretty obvious, now I think about it...

But in that case, how could they just buy GGP? They'd have to propose a price to buy a majority of shares / all of the shares for a particular price and surely there's not really any price that they could give that the majority of shareholders would accept that is less than the amount that we as shareholders would see from the profits of 25% of Havieron's in-situ metals? Sorry for the convoluted sentence. I should look up whether NCM own shares in GGP or if they just own a % of Hav.

Hi all,

Noted in Sprott's report they mentioned the fact that they believe that Newcrest want to take 100% of Havieron (to be fair, who wouldn't). They mentioned some pretty disingenuous comments from Newcrest and suggest that those comments are to put themselves in a better position to try and take the final 25% of Hav (I think through an M&A process?

The key paragraph is here: 'We note the contradiction between Newcrest’s suggested tapering of high-grade based on a single new hole
150m shallower than the still-deepest 86m @ 3.1g/t could cynically point to their own M&A interest, further supported by their making no reference in their own release to the best hole today, 150m @ 2.9g/t in the Crescent zone, itself nestling perfectly into a gap in the 4Q21 MRE. With a near-deepest 82m @ 3.0g/t AuEq drilled in the E. Breccia, itself potentially pointing to a new base metal zone with 1% Cu, our own enthusiasm for depth extensions remains undimmed. Other than M&A, drilling and the year end DFS remain key catalysts along with potential debt/funding of GGP’s share of the build.'

What I don't understand is how Newcrest could potentially acquire the remaining 25% of Havieron, as Sprott suggest they might be trying to do, and how in particular how by playing shady games such as suggesting the resource is diminishing at depth and then leaving out drill results that show that the deepest drill holes to date are still returning huge grades can put them in a better position to do so?

Any help / advice appreciated.

Kind regards,
Scipio

@Ginger,

Can I ask why you you think ORCP is so close to multibagging now? I got the impression watching the Q&A (though in fairness I was cooking while watching so not 100% focused on it, so may be mistaken) that Naheed Memon thought there was still a bit of a way to go before funding etc. moves forward on any of their projects, attractive as those projects might be.

@Zan,

Thank you very much for your impartial response.

I'm still a little concerned with potential future dilution as I find it hard to believe that a <10 million GBP MCAP company is in any real position to develop 2 multi-billion £ projects (I do know about the CPEC but need to do a bit more research into it to discover how the financing of it works - from what I've heard the Chinese are funding 80% of the majority of the projects themselves and 20% is equity financing agreements / loans at an interest rate of 1.6 to 3%? - but I find it hard to believe they would finance 80% of a multi billion £ project without expecting repayment of some kind (other than income generated by the projects they finance), and I'm also a little worried about the equity finance agreements and whether that could lead to a reduced stakeholding for both the ****stani govt. and, in particular (due to their size/lack of leverage) ORCP).

But I am really impressed by the calibre of people who hold directoral / senior positions within the company - there seem to be a lot of incredibly talented people in their respective spaces, and a lot of people with a lot of experience / access to important people and ears.

I think I will dip my toes in the water in the next couple of days and then dive in once I've completed my DD, if all seems good.

Thanks again for your response!

I've taken a small position in WSBN for some of the reasons that you mentioned but to claim shares issued and the same types or drill being used in the same general vicinity to GGP makes this an attractive, let alone a more attractive option than GGP is simply laughable.

Richard Poulden, the CEO, is a slimy grifter - I put some money in because grifters work very hard for themselves and I got into GGP too late. Doesn't mean this company has anything tangible though. You need results for that to even get mentioned next to any other junior miner. GGP has a world class asset. WSBN has dust as far as we know.

Believing in miracles makes you poorer.

@starship

Not necessarily. 10x due to some good news regarding a potential circa 3.3moz resource? Would take the MCAP here to 80 million GBP.

I am in numerous companies who have had consistently good results and good news (regarding JVs etc.) and they're still all <50 million GBP MCAP.

I don't doubt this will rerate with good news re: gold. But it won't 10x on it, especially if there is no enthusiasm for the exploration sector, which there isn't, and which is the key factor 9n valuation at this time.

Hi Bahria,

I'm a prospective investor doing a bit of research into the company. If your average is around 1.5p then I'm assuming you started investing in Oracle somewhere around 2017 or so?

I was wondering what changes have happened with the company from around that time to today? Not looking for info about the company's prospects as they are today etc. but just why the 80+% drop in share price may have happened within that time period.

Dilution? Setbacks in the gold tenements? Etc?

Apologies - hadn't had my coffee when I posted that comment... I meant that if there was 1 share in circulation then the SHARE Price would be 7 million quid.

(though I suppose it makes sense either way, haha).

take a chance, the point is that this share will not hit 30p like LND because it would need to significantly outperform LND and multi bag massively because of the fact there are so many more shares in circulation here. That's the whole point. It IS comparing apples and oranges for that reason.

It's day 1 stuff... MCAP = shares in circulation * share price. If there was 1 share in circulation, the MCAP of Oracle would be 7 million quid.

They're not saying there won't be huge multibagging potential here. Their point was that the NUMBERS QUOTED IN THAT POST were wrong DUE TO THE NUMBER OF SHARES IN CIRCULATION.