Member Info for Shedulike

Ha ha Newbie that was my 'best laid plan' before the world turned upside down. Had to de-risk over there as there is really no way of knowing what on earth the outcome will be. Strangely I was never as intrigued by their projects as I am by Toral despite it performing so much better, at least when the 'Russian discount' was a concept rather than a brutal reality! I confess I still have an interest so will be disappointed if world events have ruined what could have been an amazing story - it will be fascinating to find out what is going to happen even if it is only what might have been. Best of luck anyway.

Interesting to note the advantages of rolling it out as the mine progresses Mm's, suggests new projects will be most sought after for bolt-on geothermal projects. Just a hunch but I think it is highly likely we'll see something like this at Toral, providing we have an economic Pb, Zn, Ag mine first and foremost.

Sure CHRI5P I've always been fascinated by the copper prospects at Toral but they're obviously targeting the principal metals so far. Definitely interesting about Arc, proves a major JV is possible pre-PFS though as we all lament it would have been sweeter had we got there independently.

I suppose it's a case of being either glass half full or half empty if you thing Anglo American would negotiate a fair deal with us as appears to be the case with Arc or a bad deal as Sirius holders feel. Didn't Sirius have massive debt and unbelievable CAPEX requirements due to the complications with being on a National Park? Apples and oranges and all that. CHRI5P I wouldn't expect too much from the copper, although we're almost certain to detect it but I think the team believe the commercial levels are probably below 1000m.

From memory he did rule out diamonds in Russia when talking to Katy on Proactive :)

Didn't someone comment that 'new projects' didn't necessarily have to be mining?

Upfront CAPEX to production $US79m at the last count Bricks though costs generally will have risen. Set against that the ore sorting has demonstrated that we will need a smaller plant which will help bring it down. However that is putting the cart in front of the horse IMO and the pressing problem is funding this until we can get a BFS when bank lending to develop the mine despite being by far the much greater figure should be less problematic. I agree that the time for equity raises must be over, one consolation is we've preserved 100% ownership to get this far but it's surely time to dilute the asset and bring in significant funding to comfortably reach a BFS, get this perpetual funding monkey off our back and start progressing the SP.

Mm's in the PEA LOM revenues are put at just under $US1B but for anyone new looking in there has been much work since the Bara report which means we must have more.
- A 55% increase in indicated resources.
- Ore sorting proven to help bring in areas previously thought uneconomic into the production schedules.
- Plus ore sorting proven to improve efficiencies across the resource.
On top of this comes the impact of higher metal prices so I wonder what the the LOM revenue would be as we stand if it was re-calculated today?

Big correction in the zinc price I see. Will be interesting to see where the support kicks in, it was doing well before the smelter energy problem sent it into orbit so I expect it to level out and continue to progress hopefully steadily under growing demand from the renewable energy drive.

Blimey, lucky I keep those smelling salts in the top drawer! :) I think Elena might have gone slightly off message with the 3-4 months comment. Recently they have been very coy about drilling timescales but we know how long this stuff takes now and I think if all goes to plan they've virtually told us it's three drills in the 700-750m area joining up areas of high grade indicated. On the 'outside source' idea it's always felt like that, I think LR said that the geotech was requested. For me though I'm tired of us shouldering all the risk and these 'groups' under NDA need to put up or shut up, time to see the colour of their money I think. MC isn't daft, neither are DB or Bennelong I assume and holders should be rewarded for carrying the risk for so long which at least means we still own 100% for now (minus a few legacy duties to Lundin), in that sense PI's interests are aligned with DB and anyone new to the party should by rights be coming in at a premium to reflect the extent to which this has been de-risked on our watch.

I honestly don't know. The result of fundraising RNS doesn't mention resource drilling I notice. It does mention:
o Seeking a partial sale/earn-in/JV or similar third party agreement for the Toral Project.
Either way we're going to need funds before October, so IMO our near term fate as PI's depends on whether you think the above is at last a realistic proposition or whether they will go back to an equity raise inevitably at a new low. I'm suspicious that the drill programme is more ambitious than originally planned and I don't entirely buy the reasons for the delay. I know Atalaya and Emerita use SPI but the rig does the Geo then goes off somewhere else and comes back just two months later??? With disassembly, transport and reassembly what could it have achieved elsewhere? Must admit I don't know if it would be the same class of drill rig needed for the Geo as for deep drilling, perhaps not.

Some key points for me:
- Aiming at 7Mt of indicated (suspect they're hoping for more as we already have 6Mt).
- Confirmation of the speculated 700m + horizon.
- Looking at timescales of 3-4 months sounds like 3 holes is almost a certainty.
- Final metallurgy by the end of the month which IMO will at last contain a complete picture on delet's and by-products.
Two big questions for me - when and why did this campaign go from being 'limited' to actually quite ambitious for us?
Second could the complete metallurgical picture unlock doors for a possible pre-production agreement?

Something tangible to get our teeth into though I'm not optimistic it will engender positive thinking in everyone :)
"Drilling machine at the current work site.
New metallurgical testing carried out by Wardell Armstrong International Ltd and TOMRA over the last three months indicates a significant improvement in the concentrate production process using ore sorting methods. The laboratory plans to finish the remaining tests by the end of this month where the previous results will be confirmed. The metallurgical tests brought together the different types of mineralization existing in Toral, in order to design the most optimal and economically profitable process.
Regarding the new drilling works that are beginning, Europa Metals Iberia has once again entrusted the team of professionals at Sondeos y Perforaciones del Bierzo SL, a company with extensive experience in mining within the Iberian Peninsula and promoting work within the Bierzo region. The objective of the campaign that is starting now is to increase the indicated resource to the economically profitable volume of the deposit, over 7 million tons.
The works are expected to take around 3-4 months, where drill holes of more than 700 meters deep will be carried out, which will provide material for chemical tests and will increase the geological knowledge of the area in the parts where data is not yet available".

Just been mulling over some figures as to what this drilling will cost. Not surprisingly there are some assumptions but I think reasonable assumptions. Right, the last time we were given a definitive figure for the cost of drilling at Toral was back in 2017 when we were quoted €80m by the same contractor, SPI. Inflation rates in Spain would push that up to €87.75/m but the acceleration this year plus disproportionate inflation in construction and fuel means drilling cost are likely to subject to much higher inflation than the averaged 'basket', let's assume it might be somewhere around €100/m today, I suspect it's higher but the round figure would seem a reasonable guesstimate. Now we're told the drills are 'deep' and the last time we had a deep set we were poking away around 750m. Next assumption, we are told that we are embarking on a 'series' of drills. One is definitely not a series, I don't think two could be considered a series so let's say three. So that's 2250m at €100/m = €225,000. Another thing that isn't clear is whether we would be wedging for met samples which would add to the cost but with €144,792 coming back for completing the CDTI programme a net payout of €80,208 wouldn't seem to bad to me

I really don't know how simply I need to put this for you. I have never been given any private assurances about op's or fundraising, just a better technical understanding of what we're doing which I found helpful and after weighing up the risks I have made my own decision that the upside still makes the risk worth bearing. As I have said umpteen times while I remain positive there is a real risk of losing the lot in a stock like this. In your own words not mine you have declared that it is only FOMO and a "Morbid fascination" keeping you in this stock so I think it's pretty clear who has the more balanced rational.

Wow, you want the worlds richest man to 'slap down' the left wing on a global social media platform, doesn't sound like free speech to me. Twitter had no choice with Trump, so much power and destructive influence, refusing to accept the results of a free election and inciting supporters to storm Capital Hill, five people died remember. "For left wing read stonewall", so you know that all LGBTQ people are left wing do you? Guess you must be psychic because apparently you also know that anyone contacting management were seeking assurance and got it, did they run there communications past you because I was never given assurance's on any subject whether operational or funding. I have always wanted to understand as much as I can about the project and I guess it's similar for other investors asking questions, none of the conversations I have had have either sought or been given assurances - this allegation is in your imagination.

I thought the RNS had a ring of confidence to it. Been thinking about the phrase "Comprises a series of holes to be drilled at depth", can a series be just two or would it imply three? The reason being this doesn't sound like the "limited campaign" mentioned before to me. Three deep holes is a lot of work and if it is around the 750m horizon that's similar to what we did in 2019 when 021 deviated, 022 and 023 plus wedges were completed but it took a long time. Just wondering about funding as ever, we're even going to the wire or there's a plan, just hope it's a good one not the one where an avalanche of equity hits the register.

At least the drilling will constitute the Stage 2 work so we'll be getting the final tranche of the CDTI funds (€144,792.37) , all being well. Frustrating that we can't get the kind of grant money that would deliver a PFS, you'd think they'd want to encourage the economic activity that this could bring to the region.

Just to correct my 8:24 post we're going way deeper than hole 024, forgot that wasn't that deep at all. So probably somewhere in an area to the east of 025 but perhaps as deep as 022/023 but not beneath the current model. To fill that area with indicated will be a major plus but on the flip side if the grades disappoint Toral could look less attractive. Seems like a critical period now with the final metallurgical process coming together, work to prove the feasibility of plant construction and almost certainly the last roll of the dice with the drill bit. If someone doesn't want in after this current work I reckon it isn't a mine.

WHI View: Toral is a large deposit (Total Resource of 17Mt grading 6.9% Zn equiv.). An economic study for a 12-year mine life (from 3.8Mt grading 8.1%Zn equiv.) from an underground mine and producing separate zinc and lead concentrates containing significant by-product silver generated a $156m NPV8 at metal prices significantly less than current spot prices. Today’s update shows that Europa is planning to refine its mine plan with the ore sorting work very positive for both an increase in resource (and therefore mine life) and also the potential for a smaller back end of the plant (reduced capex) both of which will impact positively on mine economics in our view.