Member Info for ShipwreckSheep

What do you mean "we will see what happens to the Odey funds"? Hasn't it already been decided they're closing the flagship fund? The article says it'll redeem investors and has halted all dealings

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-14/odey-swan-fund-assets-collapsed-37-in-two-days-before-closing

Not that crazy price action if they held close to 12% of outstanding shares

There's also a new broker note by Shard Capital from 12th June which seemed pretty positive

Of course it doesn't change what resources are in the ground telegraphist, but it does affect how the information is perceived by the market, wouldn't you agree? You can say "Share price doesn't matter", but it's still a junior explorer, so without a revenue stream, and therefore of course at some point of course will have to raise funds to have a budget for the next exploration programme to further expand the resource and get closer to mining. So current share price does matter even if your investment rationale is a long-term one, as it can affect the level of dilution, and consequently how market perceives information matters.

Decent grades at Bradman and I'm very happy with that, all I'm saying is, polishing up their communications would make a big difference. We all know how a lot of Cobra shares are in sticky hands, everybody who ever tried to put in a buy order for 10k GBP knows how difficult it is to get one's hands on a larger number of shares in a short span of time, so if improved communications can even just bring 5-10 new investors on board who agree that the future looks bright and want to build a decent position (say 30-50k GBP), for a share like this, that wouldn't result in a 10% SP rise, but a 100%+ one.

Encouraging results given that Bradman is not part of the resource yet at all. Hopefully we get results from Thompson next.

I wish they went on the attack with RNS wording a bit more though, the paragraph you copied in is worded so defensively, communication can still improve a lot.

1) "likely inform a significant resource update". Why "likely"? No need to insert that word.

2) "establishing Wudinna as a potential tier-1 rare earth project". Could also be worded as "The results further confirm our view that Wudinna is evolving into a tier-1 rare earth project"

3) "whose unique proximity to gold mineralisation has the potential to contribute favourably to economics". There's no need here at all for conditional wording, that's a fact that the REE in the overburden improve the economics of gold extraction, so for heaven's sake, just say "whose unique proximity to gold mineralisation contributes favourably to economics".

I think most of the questions you bring up here, he has answered.

Gold resource update will be end of June or July according to the work plan and has had this as target date since they have decided to cut short the Q4 RC drilling and do an extended 2023 RC drilling instead (which still will go into the updated gold resource) - see page 21 in the latest presentation: https://cobraplc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Cobra-Resources-May-2023-update.pdf

On Andromeda: To be honest, he should clarify that in one of the interviews, but they have submitted accounts to Andromeda in Q4 when the threshold was hit and then notified market when the 75% threshold was confirmed. So by the clauses of the Wudinna agreement, the exploration costs are now shared between both parties. I asked about it in my email to the company last week, the reply on this was "Expenditure was achieved through the 2022 Exploration programme; the deferred announcement was owing to an independent audit of expenditure. Both parties are working to consolidate the structure in which the parties intend to progress the Wudinna Project and a further announcement will be made in due course. "

On timescale: I agree with you, this should be handled in a "underpromise and overdeliver" way. The drilling itself was finished on time, and to be honest, the assay results are in line with the presentation above (from 9th May) as well, which indicates assay results for May and June. BUT: The RNS on the same day mentioned that for gold the remaining gold RC (and selected AC holes) are expected during May, that the REE results from RC are expected in late May, and the AC results for gold and REE through May & June. I don't know why they do that in the RNS, just say "remaining RC results and AC results are expected through May & June" and all is fine, everybody knows that Aussie assay turnaround times are a bit unpredictable anyway, but by saying "during May" and "in late May" for RC in the RNS, of course some shareholders will say "well, they said May, it's June now and those results aren't in yet". To no fault of their own, because it's just the labs that take a bit longer to get the assay results back to the company, but by giving such specific timeframe, they just keep unnecessarily putting themselves in a tricky situation from a communications perspective. I mean, I'm not sure when the AC drilling was completed, my understanding was that it was either very late April or early May, it'd have been very surprising to actually get part of the AC results in late May then, 4 weeks for assay turnaround? Yeah, well, unlikely, so should have just said "through May and June" like in the presentation.

Personally I'm optimistic about the further REE update and that they get out the gold resource update end of Q2 or start of Q3, but I do understand whoever has been selling given the self-inflicted wounds from putting out too tight assay result timelines repeatedly, thereby creating shareholder expecta

Long weekend, so to make the wait for the remaining RC and AC drilling results a bit shorter, here some info from the company replying to questions I sent via email:

1) On potential tin prospectivity, it seems like Wudinna itself hasn't shown signs of tin, but the 100% owned exploration tenement does and they are seeking regulatory approvals for the exploration: "The company assays for Tin at Wudinna; the reality is that Cobra has not seen any indicators to support tin prospectivity. However, on EL6806, there is a lead-zinc-sliver occurrence where there is highly anomalous tin. Cobra is working through the regulatory approvals process to evaluate this area in more detail."

2) Clarification on the paleochannel(s) that we discussed here in the past week: "The Boland prospect relates a defined target zone within the 65km2 area of the Corrobinnie palaeochannel. Cobra has historic data from uranium exploration that has enabled the calculation of normalised pyrite and enabled it to make assumptions on REDOX chemistry but does not provide REE assays. There is a second palaeochannel to the north named Thulga which is also of interest. The company is investigating whether REEs have been mobilised into the channel. If that is the case, it could be significant."

3) Finally, for Ken, I also asked about Lithium of course: "Cobra regularly reviews opportunities both within and outside Australia across a range of critical/strategic metals. Whilst lithium is on a surge, mineralogy is a principal driver for a successful lithium project. The market to secure robust lithium projects in desirable jurisdictions with the right geology to generate spodumene mineralisation is competitive. If Cobra identifies the right opportunity it may consider such a project."

And you think you posting "DOWN DOWN DOWN" helps with that? 1) We'd all be much happier if the SP was on a 2 handle, no doubt, but in the end, another way to look at it is that we're at the level this was in early Feb 2022 - a lot of other mining shares can only dream of that, including previous LSE explorer/developer darlings GGP (declined more than 50% since early Feb 2022 and over 80% from its peak) and EUA (declined close to 90% since early Feb 2022), so from a relative value perspective nothing is all too bad. Sentiment for small caps has not shifted back to positive yet, look at GDXJ still being down almost 40% from its 2020 highs even though gold price really isn't far from the ATH.

Releases have been on track again in Q1 and Q2 so far, it's been clearly communicated after the delay in Q4 with the unseasonably wet spring in South Australia that the gold resource update will be after the current RC/AC drilling campaign, it's also now been communicated in the newest presentation that there'll be another REE resource update this year as well, on the investor engagement front, one really has to say that Rupert is doing what he can to have some interviews also outside of direct post-RNS interviews with Proactive, there's been some clarification on the JV front with the 75% earn in confirmation. What do you want them to do differently at the moment? If nothing, why write a post like this that best case does nothing (as no constructive information) and worst case just adds to negative sentiment?

Think you're right that it's in the 75% tenement - the 100% owned ones would be further to the east and/or north. Just a naming confusion on my side there then, as Corrobinnie also seems to be the name of the 100% owned tenement to the East, from the website: "One adjacent exploration tenement (Corrobinnie – 100% Cobra Resources) covering 532 km2 sits outside the Wudinna Project and is prospective for orogenic lode gold and IAC style rare earth mineralisation"

So essentially that means there's another paleochannel other than the Boland/Bradman one, have not heard about that before, does anyone here know if there were any drilling results for the Corrobinnie one in the past?

Couldn't make it either, sadly, would have been interesting to get some more info about the paleochannel that they got excited about around Boland and Bradman. One thing that I noticed in the corporate presentation slides (page 9) is that the map has the item "Corrobinnie Paleochannel". Which is a separate one to the Boland/Bradman one - and Corrobinnie is the 100% Cobra-owned tenement. (https://cobraplc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Cobra-Resources-May-2023-update.pdf)

Some big egos going on here the past days haha

I don't know if anyone has seen it, I haven't seen it posted here and had missed it myself, but Rupert and Co had released a new presentation on 9th May: https://cobraplc.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Cobra-Resources-May-2023-update.pdf

Some interesting graphs in there, like Australia projected to produce 20% of the world's REE by 2030. One would think that this means a lot of the "50 recent finds" might come into production and not "only 2 or 3 and there will be tears". Some nice info on the paleochannel they focus on at Boland as well, and finally the info that gold AND REE resource update will come at the end of Q2 or start of Q3, that's good news imo, as far as I know the info we had so far was only "gold resource will be updated after this drilling campaign and MAYBE there will also be another REE resource update this year", so it's great to see it confirmed. There's also a scoping study on the work plan for Q4, so gloves are coming off slowly.

On the whole ego fights: Ken, by all means, if you have a lithium project in mind that Cobr should look at and try to bring into the project portfolio, talk to them, I'm sure they'll take your call. If not, what is this all about? Sure, lithium is a hot commodity right now and there's big rises, but to say "i saw 150% rise in a week in some lithium stocks, that'll never happen in Cobra"? It was up 150% YTD last year at some point and most of that happened Feb - Apr, so yeah, it wasn't in a week, it was in 2 months, but it can quite easily happen in Cobra too, it did. Anyway, there's always a "hot commodity", you can always say "in 2022, Cobra would probably have done better if they were a coal explorer, or oil & gas explorer", in 2021 you could have said "Cobra would have done better if they were a uranium explorer". In 2020 you could have said "Cobra would have done better if they were developing vaccines". None of that is or was their focus, and neither is lithium, so unless you have a lithium project in mind to pitch to them (if so, pitch it to them!), one has to ask what the point of these polemic posts is. Especially when it's pretty easy to see scenarios hot REEs become the "hot commodity of the year", part of that will happen with the supply/demand gap that is in the presentation I linked to above anyway, and on top of that if there's any China/Taiwan escalation and China weaponize their commodities just like Russia did with their nat gas, suddenly REE prices will be 1000% up, just like European nat gas was last year. Doesn't happen you say? Well, Dysprosium oxide went 900% up in 2011, right? And that was a mini escalation with China, not one of the scale we could see if/when China eventually targets Taiwan. In a nutshell: If you have a lithium project to contribute, have serious talks about it with Rupert & co, rather than pushing around retail investor sentiment in a tiny board, more worthwhile surely with your connections to the board

Even for the gold itself, can you please explain why you seem that negative about it? Cause frankly, as mentioned before, it's in line with grades of the JORC resource and when I try to find what's economical for open pit gold mining, the rough guideline Google spits out is

Open Pit:

Low grade 0 - 0.5 gold grams per tonne

Average grade 0.5 - 1.5 gold grams per tonne

High grade 1.5 + gold grams per tonne

So with the current JORC resource at 1.5 g/t and the new results not that far off, it would seem like Cobra's gold falls in the "high end of average grade range" for open pit gold mines.

Hi Ken,

Don't you think you're being a bit dramatic there? It's great that other companies in Australia also discovered REE resources, however that does not make the resource here "flogging a dead horse" - you've compared the grades to AR3 yourself last year, so I'm sure you are well aware that the grades of both projects are similar, so are you also saying AR3 should leave their REE resource to rot rather than mine it, when market values them at the equivalent of 20m GBP for it? And that's AR3's only project. To say what you said about Cobra's REE potential hence seems a bit at odds with reality, especially at a time when the company got excited about a new structure they found at Boland that could enhance the REE potential considerably. Yeah, AR3 are further along the exploration process, but REE is open in all directions at Wudinna still, so no reason to believe that the resource will not be province-size.

The gold hits, while not amazing grades, are also pretty much consistent with the gold JORC resource grades, I don't think anyone expected that testing for extension of the strike at Clarke would suddenly hit bonanza grade. Would these grades be economical as a pure gold mining open pit operation? To be honest, I don't know, but not impossible; but combined with the REE on top of the gold, it very much should be.

Fair enough that you thought Wudinna would even have more potential when you first pitched that deal, and everybody who follows your Twitter knows you're a lithium bug, which is fine, but that doesn't mean that you have to push the lithium idea on a company that hasn't been involved in lithium at all so far!? So if you say "There's firms with better grades of REE which I now prefer", that's your personal choice and a valid one, but why spin it as if Cobra should just drop Wudinna when the grades and potential of the REE itself (forget about the gold if you want) is similar to AR3, which has a valuation more than double that of Cobra?

Come on Michael, a couple of days late isn't really late, Rupert said they expect assays to come back from the labs end of April, can't really change lab turnaround times - all it means is the results will drop soon.

As long as they're not late with things that are under the company's control, like the drilling itself or the work on the gold resource update, all is good I'd argue.

Okay and then what exactly do you mean by "steady newsflow"? When you say that's what's needed to attract more investors? It's been 1 or 2 RNS each month for the past year, that's pretty steady, isn't it? And that's what we'll get now too anyway, also if they release all RC results at once. If it's outstanding hits, one RNS with all 20 drillholes is all you need to attract more investors, whereas if it's mediocre results, 3 RNS with results 6 or 7 drillholes each won't do much either - much more about quality of the results and keeping newsflow roughly on schedule with the work programme from the presentation than the number of releases.

Why do you think so necessarily? The two drilling/reanalysis result RNS that really did a lot of positive things for the SP in 2022 were the one from 7 Feb 2022 and the one from 6 Apr 2022, both ones that reported A LOT of drillholes all at once.

There'll be enough news flow probably over the next months for a new RNS each month at the very least, so if they release all RC results now, then all AC results, then the updates gold JORC resource, possibly a JV update once they have agreed with Andromeda on the best structure to proceed, etc that'd be best imo - if they drip-feed the drilling results, the danger is that they very much fly under the radar

Andromeda also mentioning the completion of the 75% earn-in in a release yesterday, good to see:
https://www.andromet.com.au/assets/Quarterly-Activities-Appendix-5B-Cash-Flow-Report_2023-04-27-010328_yrmm.pdf

He's right in this case, trading4good, the official mid-price shown on here at the lowest point yesterday was 5.10 and that was a 52w low mid price. However, the fact that he focuses on beating the drum about "this reached another low intraday!" on a day that continued very very encouraging for the share when it closed 20% higher vs previous to make it well off the bottom suggests that he's extremely biased in focusing on the negatives rather than the positives in his commentary. Why that is? That's anyone's guess. And it doesn't mean that certain things he posts aren't adding value to anybody analysing the company, but his commentary should probably be read with caution, keeping in mind that he's biased to over-emphasise the negatives.

My bad, actually it is made fully clear that the threshold has been reached in the 2022 year:

"Through the 2022 exploration programme, the Company has achieved the 75% project earn-in milestone defined under the terms of the Wudinna Heads of Agreement between Lady Alice Mines Pty Ltd (a Cobra Resources Company) and Peninsula Resources (an Andromeda Metals subsidory)."

To be honest, more info in here that are SP-positive than I'd expect from any single set of RC drilling results (although of course there's always a chance they find something completely unexpected, so if there's bonanza grades in the drilling results, I'll happily eat my words).

Cash position at year-end is indicating that hopefully there's a few months left before they need new funds for more exploration work & even though it's not been made fully clear when the 75% threshold has been reached, given that they gave Andromeda time to check the accounts to confirm the threshold has been reached, my guess is it must have been before this RC/AC drilling campaign that started in March, which would mean that Cobra already isn't carrying the exploration cost burden on its own anymore.

There we go, 75% earn-in level reached and confirmed, Level 1 of my "steps to derisk the operation" done, check.