Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Question...
Can CB use this evening to release data to the market as long as an RNS is released simultaneously ?
Meaning today is a good PR platform to release something additional - "special" - assays, or a revised 3D model for example, or even engagement with majors...
ATB Shorn
georgej48
If you look at this image you will see that they (H20 & H21) are at the same ground (pad) location as H0018 & H008 respectively.
https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8649O_2-2021-10-12.pdf
I can only think that the drill angles are different (deeper?) but not sure if they exactly follow on the old drill orientation...
IMO ATB Shorn
Probably my ignorance here but NPV means net "present" value so the cost of capital "now" shows a poor return "today" but to get the GGP /NC project on track they are accelerating the process to start making money early, for Telfar continuity maybe ?? Suffering a lower 4% NPV in the meantime to get to a greater goal...
Surely when the full size of the resource is confirmed the NPV would be a much higher percentage as a good proportion of the initial capital will not be spent twice. Meaning in the LOM NPV is not static or flat it rises and has a sweet spot during the LOM journey. In essence XTR starting with a very economical open pit (porphyry orientation, less waste, etc) would attract majors as the NPV through PFS would look very investible - leaving further research in to the wider BR opportunities for later to see if we can further increase the resource value and NPV.
I am not experienced in mining so forgive the obvious mistakes here, but i can accept an initial lower NPV if the ultimate goal gives far more. Possibly majors will not accept such a position, but NC seems to be ok with the status!?!
Folks i realise this hasn't a great deal to do with XTR, but in a sense these are discussions we may have next year...
theiceberg - i am not questioning your experience or knowledge, only genuinely getting my own head around the balance of data.
IMO ATB Shorn
@thelearner - i am invested in GGP too.
Never had a good experience posting on that board, questions posed can be viewed as threatening at times , but as you say there are some quality posters.
I am enjoying the ride much more on this board and have been here since c2p and am looking forward to Thursday evening.
With respect to theicebergs GGP comments - i take his valued point, and i also remember one comment he made recently (which i also totally agree with) - that CB & the team are approaching this resource at two steps firstly "initial open pit" achieving the decision to mine / 2MT AAL option trigger, and secondly proving up a much greater resource (2nd open pit, one large open pit and / or underground mine, taking the resource potentially way way beyond 2MT). Step 1's value is not as much as Step 1+2, and this is my point... isn't that the same as GGP pfs based on a specific small portion of the GGP resource, the future would therefore with greater drilling and similar detail be a greater more valuable resource ? As would the case with XTR in the fullness of time...
This is not an attempt to ramp GGP they manage to do that themselves quite well...
IMO ATB Shorn
@jerryspaniel
I asked a simple & reasonable question, and got the following response from you...
"So shorn at the recent low you had over £180,000 invested in ggp but you weren’t paying much attention. So are you very rich or very stupid? Possibly both."
So jerry being invested here is a stupid decision, including the decision you made ?
Who the "f" do you think you are, me thinks you are bit of a - t w a t !
@jerryspaniel,
I have 1.2m shares here but have been focused on other Copper / Lithium based investments during the period GGP retraced.
The volume of data shared on this board is significant and am only trying to catch up with current thinking on future MRE values.
Sorry to trouble you with the question.
ATB Shorn
@jerryspaniel
MRE - doubled in December announcement and not priced in the very recent SP increase.
That as a result of some maths or what the board feels is the case ?
I am not de-ramping just trying to get a sense of the wiser thoughts on this board at to likely upcoming MRE uplift ??
ATB Shorn
@TT
Been an investor for a while but have not followed the board for some time (around GH's departure).
Are there any thoughts (from those wiser than me on this board) on the increased size of the MRE ?
And to what extent might some of the increase already be priced in the current SP ?
Sorry in advance if this question is a repeat and going over old ground.
ATB Shorn
stevemocal
I am inclined to agree with your thinking - CB's going to feed us positive RNS's right up to the evening with him.
Could this be part of a wider PR plan including a revised 3D model being released on the evening together with a 6pm RNS - and an announcement...??
IMO ATB Shorn
andmillsy
I have emailed to ask whether there will be live streaming or a recording posted after the event. I'll feedback any responses.
I am logging all questions raised and by whom as the week has gone on - i note there have been no questions about any other project which either helps cash flow, or indeed about Zambia opportunity...
Additionally, it would be really helpful if "theiceberg" attended or at least lists questions either here or via his blog - where are you sir ?
ATB Shorn
andmillsy, CaveatEmptor,
Agreed a good start - though as CB often reads these boards having the heads up to the flavour of the questions will give him a steer as to getting his ducks in line when it comes to responses...
Do we know if theiceberg is coming next week - as he defo has to contribute to the questions if he's not attending...
ATB Shorn
andmilsy
Page 10 of the report (dated January 2020)...
"In our previous report (Jan 2020) we identified that there were 55 development and exploration
projects with resources of more than 3.0Mt contained copper and noted that only 21
of these had the potential to involve a third party. Even then, many of these projects
have issues of one kind or another, and we concluded that there were just five
projects with a ‘High’ possibility of a third party (or an existing minority shareholder)
looking to acquire the project outright or take a significant interest. "
Comment - only 5 in the world !!
"Some 14 months later we have reviewed the copper projects database within the
revised parameters and find that there are now 64 development and exploration
projects with resources of more than 2.5Mt contained copper and we believe that only
19 of these have the potential to involve third party M&A activity and again we
conclude that there are just five projects with a ‘High’ possibility of a third party
involvement."
This report even after the 14 month review stage is too early for Bushranger to be included. I note the resource cut off for the report at >2.5MT. However, 5 projects that they perceive as high possibility for M&A is very low given the falling Copper supply, and knowing the ramping up in demand coming...
Most projects were at pre-feasibility / feasibility - scoping stages, so i am not sure how long that would take XTR to achieve ?
I do agree andmillsy that if (when) we get over the 2MT -> 2.5MT and have a project at a similar stage we would be very strong contender as a M&A target...
IMO ATB Shorn