Member Info for SpaceHoppa

Like everyone else Surfit, I am just speculating. However people make decisions then later change their minds, as do governments and companies.
I do not agree that HBR deciding to keep a minority stake in SL would look unprofessional as they can bat that away with the obvious excuse that circumstances, ie price of oil and gas has changed significantly with Russian aggressive threats. It's worth a thought I feel.

As I said,
''It's just speculation'' and
''no notification HBR are out yet'' and
'' back when they were making their decision oil was low $70/bbl, now it is nudging $95''

I understand people saying HBR wont change their mind over Sea Lion, they may be right. However I am not so sure.

HBR evidently did not fancy being 40% operator of SL.
It was not their thing and they may have doubted their abilities.
But back when they were making their decision oil was low $70/bbl, now it is nudging $95.
Navitas have been very keen for a long while, and are both capable of developing and financially adept.
I can see a deal whereby HBR keep a small toe in, 10%, maybe 15%.

There has been no notification HBR are out yet, and a 3 way deal takes some pressure off Navitas.
It's just speculation, and Navitas may want all their 65%. I just feel HBR are having second thoughts.

CAN $0.68 is 39pence.
It would be good for this jump to be more based on improvements at the mine,
which I feel is coming, as opposed to a Russian inspired spike on gold.

$94 as I type and gold up $30/oz. Russian aggression clearly the factor.

Having a reliable source of oil and gas never looking more sensible!

Hopefully that translate to UK encouragement for Falkland oil and gas too !!

Six North Sea oil and gas fields to be fired up amid Cabinet row over net zero
New drilling to be approved as Number 10 faces resistance over green moves and spending

By
Tony Diver,
POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT and
Ben Riley-Smith,
POLITICAL EDITOR
7 February 2022 • 9:45pm

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/02/07/six-north-sea-oil-gas-fields-fired-amid-cabinet-row-net-zero/

It's been
4 weeks since 'Each party files an updated submission on costs.' (January 10, 2022)
7 weeks since, the 'Company was informed that the Tribunal had rejected Italy's request.' (21 December 2021)
6 months since ICSID said ‘the Tribunal had informed the Company that it expected to complete its work in July 2021’
2 years 3 months since the 'Tribunal holds a hearing on post-hearing briefs in Paris' (October 30, 2019)

Jesus F Christ ICSID, just make your fringing minds up !!

Looks like trade with Israel is going to get a boost.
It would be good to hear of a Rock trade deal with Navitas at the same time!

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1557916/brexit-news-eu-trade-deal-israel-boris-johnson

Perhaps Darton, but we all should know broker notes aren't really worth too much whoever writes them as they fluctuate with the wind.

''15pence from 32pence'' would indicate a great near 50% return for a new investor.

Additionally Troy and Maryse do seemed to have had an immediate impact on performance in Dec
''3,905 - A Record month for PureGold'
and their target is Gold Production of 3,500 – 4,500 oz per month in Q1

Proof as always is in the pudding, but as you've sold out it makes no odds to you now.

https://www.sprott.com/media/4826/220127-scp-pgm-equity.pdf

RECOMMEND HOLD FROM BUY
TARGET C$0.85/sh
RISK RATING: HIGH

We are impressed by the operational focus of new management, and are encouraged that lower than
desired grades could just be the results of a tougher ore body at McVeigh (western decline, 83koz @
6.7g/t). As this only represents 8% of reserves, once mining ramps up on the easier eastern ore body at
Austin (eastern decline, 676koz @ 8.6g/t), itself representing 67% of reserves, grades should improve. In
the LT, 8 Zone’s 228koz @ 17g/t, and extensions thereof, are the holy grail of course.

While sufficient development is into the eastern decline for drill cubbies, we don’t think there is sufficient development just
yet for the operational flexibility required to maintain when inevitable sub-prime stopes emerge. Today’s
equity covers just that. However, ~C$25m pq site opex implies mining costs potentially approaching
C$300/t against C$169/t DFS. While this will of course drop considerably once steady-state is reached, it
is unclear if this will occur fast enough to ensure no further equity is required. Specifically, 80koz pa and
spot US$1,792/oz implies C1/AISC of ~US$500/800/oz would be required to cover current outgoings, pre
tax, royalties, finance costs, G&A and debt principle. In the short term, the equity will fund additional
sustaining capex and opex burn during ramp up, but long-term mining costs are very hard to forecast with
a NAV of anywhere for C$700m to C$950m at C$169-300/t mining costs. As such, we lower our NAV
multiple from 0.9x to 0.7x to reflect our uncertainty until more visibility is provided on sustainable
operating metrics / costs.

On that basis, we lower our recommendation from BUY to HOLD and lower our
PT from C$1.60/sh to C$0.85/sh based mainly on the higher opex and lower NAV multiple. Of course we
hope for investor’s sake that this is the last equity, but that wasn’t the case several times last year. We
remain positive in the long term, as (i) completing East ramp development for higher grades at Austin, and
(ii) medium-term access to 8 Zone, have the potential to shift this operation from loss-making to profitable.

Why we like Pure Gold
1. Existing 1Moz @ 9g/t reserve in favourable jurisdiction
2. 80koz pa DFS lifts to 110koz pa with satellite 271koz @ 6.7g/t mineable in PEA
3. Permitting precedent to expand mill from DFS 800tpd to 1,089tpd, but potential 1,600tpd
4. Exploration upside: Wedge satellite(s), high-grade 8 Zone

Is this new, or perhaps I missed (forgot about) it??

https://www.puregoldmining.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/PureGold-Deck-January-4-2022-Final-C.pdf

Sadly to be expected given the shockers of Oct and Nov production !
Darin ramped the company but reality was they aren't cash neutral yet,
and so need more funds. Meaning we all get diluted AGAIN.

I am minded to give new CEO Troy the time to prove he can turn this around.
This dilution is directly because ramper Labrenz and co directors weren't competent in 2021 at running a working mine.

Troy, ''on paper'', is very capable, so the jury remains out. I wont be adding as I have too much here already.
Proof will be in the deliverance of significant amounts of gold at a reasonable AISC. Q1 will be telling !

Thanks for the link Cyan. That puts to bed who is on the hook for the TDF, although amount is unknown.
With the new dock some years off, I maintain the issue of de-commissioning looks a few years off.

It also may never happen at all if it can hopefully be used by Rock/Navitas, assuming FID is approved,
or re-purposed for other uses.

Falky, I am unsure of the extent, past or present, of FIG or Nobles ownership to the TDF. Perhaps other bloggers have more solid information??

I am not sure how much it will cost to decommission, but I beleive it cost $4.5m to build. So the cost to Rock is not going to be $millions for Rocks 40% share.
Also the new dock hasn't even passed approval stage yet and unless the TDF has passed it's sell by date, or is in the way, FIG may wish to keep it.

Eitherway it's a problem that will likely occur way after OM decision and JV agreement, so Rock should be in a much stronger position by then if those are positive.

I disagree Latics.
The higher the oil price, the more likely SL will get FID.
If oil was $10 the SP wouldn't be 8pence.

I liked BHSLCF.
He was an acquired taste, Marmitie for sure, however often talked sense and had a sharp understanding and good contacts with the likes of Clarke and MarlonMonkey.

It was crazy of Harbour to dump SL even if it isn't their 'thing'.
A better move would have been to hand over operatorship to Navitas and retain 15 to 20%
And that is still possible as there hasn't been an announcement that Harbour have relinquished their % yet,
even though officially they were out as of 31st of December.

The longer we hear nothing of Harbour being out, the more I think they may keep a slice !
$89/barrel, the world becoming more thirty for oil and reliable gas, and a lack of exploration for new supplies in recently years, is certainly a reason why they may consider I feel.

Also it's good to hear from Hairydavey that the saga of ICSID might actually be coming to it's conclusion.
I feel the deal between, Navitas/ Rock and possibly Harbour or another, is perhaps waiting on the financial situation Rock will be in once the award is known.

After the lawyer backers take their take Wraith, and if the win is just our sunk costs,
then we could be left with perhaps $20m.

I think it is better to expect less, and be pleasantly surprised when it turns out (Tomorrow) to be $200m :-)

Oh yes Wraith, I remember the DES oil to water Rns from many a year back.
I consider myself very lucky as sold out on the oil 'discovery' RNS with a very small profit,
which felt like a win at the time!

With Rock I need 15 pence to break even.
If as I 99% believe, Rock win the Arb' with perhaps min $30m, and Navitas sign, then 15pence should easily be surpassed.
But every day is a disappointment as ICSID and Italy drag out the case and I am sure I am not alone in feeling that way at 7.01AM every day.