Member Info for Steve4077

Pops1980 returns! Its been a while!

>> Explaining/excusing the comm's is fine the first three times, or even ten times, but after a while you have to accept you aren't going to stop people complaining! ;)

Yes, very true :)

>> Did CB not say he'd be releasing the geophysics to the market and confirming when drill pad approvals were received? Do you think they are still waiting on them or are they being sat on (for whatever reason)? I

We've had the approvals. That can be inferred from the new drill locations. I'm fairly sure we have had the geophysics too. I agree we should have had that in an RNS and that in general comms could be better. I also know that CB reads here and will see all these comments and know there are holders who are unhappy about the current comms and that has been true for many, many years.

Pointing out that comms aren't great is fine the first three times or even ten times. After a while though you have to accept that complaining isn't achieving anything. Colin is the way he is. Yes, he should probably behave differently with regard to comms, but he doesn't and he won't change. This is the way it is at XTR and other CB companies. You either A) Accept that factor and live with it, B) Sell because of it or C) Regularly complain about something you already know won't change. I have chosen option A). I can only suggest to reduce personal frustration that other shareholders could do the same.

TBF I wasn't saying all LTH are overly focused on CB's past behaviour - just some of them. I also agree about the past missed deadlines, etc and I can understand why that can lead to a lack of trust among LTH. I also agree that same over-optimism will almost certainly happen again and anything CB says in interviews should be assessed in that context.

The only point I am trying to make - unsuccessfully I think :) - is that some people seem so focused on that element of CBs personality that it effectively obscures the positive elements he brings - deal-making for example - and prevents a more impartial view of the whole situation at XTR because the 'CB factor' is given too great a weight.

You could effectively ignore every Colin interview and only look what is hard knowledge and still see this as a great investment.

BTW I do agree that the past comms with the team in Australia have been excellent and I would like to see more of that. It seems reasonable to assume that CB must know that too. However, given his recent comments about 'keeping cards close to our chest' (and assuming that isn't misleading in some way), it seems unlikely he would want another similar video interview going into the model details until all his ducks are in a row.

We don't know everything - agreed. However, we do know a lot based on 100+ RNS in the last two years and can infer more from that knowledge base. If we had 100% knowledge then so would everyone else and there would be no profit to be made. Researching and making a educated guess at the gaps is where you can gain an advantage. Even you take a worst case scenario for the knowledge gaps, it is difficult to see a downside. The best case scenario is huge. What you do right now depends a lot on your risk profile, patience, confidence in your own research during a falling share price, and your ability to sift through ramps and de-ramps. patience

Yes, Colin is over-optimistic and we do have periods where comms is less frequent than the past, but still a lot more frequent than most companies. However, there do seems to be some LTH who are fixated on Colin's past missed 'deadlines' or 'broken promises' and assign more weight to that factor than all the hard knowledge already available.

It just seems crazy to me to assume that because we haven't had an RNS or interview for a couple of weeks that it must be because Colin is some Machiavellian villain of AIM, intent on hiding crucial information or causing damage to shareholders. He has 44m shares and options, which gives him considerable motivation to do a good deal for shareholders. He has already delivered a huge amount on BR already. What we have already discovered at BR and achieved at Manica isn't going to suddenly vanish because Colin sets over-optimistic dates.

Yes, that correct. Also I think, based on interviews, that Colin is planning to use a discounted cash flow model as part of the decision to mine to demonstrate the net present value (profitability of the mine over its life vs investing the money instead). In that way, he not only triggers the decision to mine, but gives AA real evidence of the mine's potential value. This model is what the team has been working on for the last months, updating it as we get new assays, metallurgical analysis, IP surveys, etc.

BTW it seems obvious that Colin can't say "We are confident of 2mt but we aren't declaring it because we want to wait until conditions improve and the copper price goes back up". Anglo would no doubt involve lawyers at that point. Instead, assuming Colin really does want to delay - either for 2mt or decision to mine - he would go quiet and find things that will justifiably occupy a few more weeks/months.

Yes, we can either declare 2mt or a decision to mine. Either one triggers the buy-out process and forces Anglo to make a fairly quick decision. If they decide not to proceed then we can (hopefully) start a bidding war. This might actually be the best option but probably not right now due to market conditions. Ideally, I think we need to wait a while before triggering the buy-back.

Assuming Anglo did exactly as you say, that doesn't mean we don't get paid. We could either sell ProspectOre and therefore the extra 20% to someone else, or use the alternative from the June 1st 2020 RNS (below). Worst case is 80% of value plus 0.75% royalty with no costs to pay. As Colin said, it is unlikely Anglo would want a 20% partner, either XTR or someone else, but even if they did, we are still in good shape

"Anglo may buy-back 80% of the Racecourse deposit at fair market value as determined by an Independent Expert in accordance with the JORC and Valmin Code. Anglo and ProspectOre would then provide funding pro-rata to their interests, save that ProspectOre may decide not to provide its share of funding and be diluted, ultimately retaining a 0.75% net smelter royalty (NSR)"

For someone with a lot of shares, its just odd you seem to try to present the worst possible outcome without noting the reality in that situation. Even if you want to sell, why would you try to present the company in a worse light than necessary?

>> So I agree you are probably right Andrew in that it ‘is’ us post BR investors that have a blinkered view as we naturally are more protective of our own egos and anything negative that challenges what justified them decisions to buy in.

Ego is a very dangerous thing in investing :)

I don't have a problem with negative comments, especially if they are backed with evidence. I saved myself a decent amount a couple of years ago by researching the comments made by someone who I thought might have been de-ramping, but I wanted to be sure. Fortunately, I got out before what he predicted came true. I have also bailed on another couple of large investments, accepting a sizeable loss in one of those cases, when new information became available. Both stocks are now much lower. You have to constantly re-evaluate and avoid getting emotionally invested in a stock.

What I do have an issue with is unsubstantiated negative comments with no supporting evidence, obvious de-ramping or trolling, presenting only negatives without considering offsetting positives or simply complaining because there hasn't been an RNS for a couple of weeks.

I accept that longer-term holders than me have a bad impression of CB, mainly it seems around optimistic date setting and events that happened two years ago or longer. However, given the 100+ RNS delivered in the last two years, the massive drilling program at BR, the very good signs coming out of Manica with regard to production that will eliminate the need for future raises, the gold at Ascot, Colin's track record in achieving a sale in the past, etc., I don't really care if Colin consistently over-promises on dates, either in the past or the future. I am basing my investment on the results, not the promises.

If at some point, some actual negative evidence appears about XTR in the present or the future, then I may sell, but I won't be selling because of what happened years ago when this was a company in a very different situation with a different team and different partners.

> > Steve can I ask your opinion? Do you think Colin was guessing regarding "minerals that we think are down there" when he was describing the holes to us in the interviews :-)

You'll need to be a little more specific about what he was describing. He usually talks about that have already been drilled though, rather than what we might find in future holes.

In exploration, forward guidance is never going to be completely reliable. We are drilling holes up to three thousand feet deep and hoping to hit minerals that we think are down there (based on other drills and various surveys) but it is definitely not an exact science. As each hole is drilled, the knowledge gained will likely change the future plans.

The share price will reflect that uncertainty as some investors will not want to invest until they are certain of what is down there. Of course, by that point the price will be higher. It depends on the level of risk you are willing to accept based on the available information and the potential downside.

I think XTR's most important aspect is the lack of potential downside. It may be hard to judge exactly how much the share price might increase right now, but its hard to see how it doesn't go up from here over the longer term.

>> Consistently late, sure you do....

You are missing the point. The developer or analyst says project X will take 2 days and I know from experience it will take a week because he is over-optimistic and he will run into problems he hasn't considered. So he is late vs the target he set, but actually did a great job and in the timeframe I expected.

Now we have project Y. Developer says 2 days and I know it will be a week because he just can't help being optimistic and he will run into problems he hasn't considered...

Am I really supposed to fire this excellent developer because he is always optimistic? He delivers well - he just doesn't deliver vs his own optimistic timeframes. I wish you could understand this difference.

I've been a Director of Analytics at a FTSE 100 company for 11 years. Why? because I make them millions every year and I get all the time and space I want to do it.

As well as running a large team, I choose my own personal projects, which often involve analytical research and go in unexpected directions. I have never been threatened with dismissal because I found something new and decided to pursue it. I have elements of my personality that annoy people, but they are accepted because I deliver revenue from discovering things that no one else has, not because I deliver a fixed quantity of work in a fixed quantity of time.

>> Would you accept a consistently late deliverable from someone working for you? - I assume you'd fire them pretty sharpish.

Actually, I do that all the time. Most developers are terrible at estimating how long something takes - they are always massively optimistic, so I automatically compensate for it when I get their estimates. Otherwise I would be firing otherwise excellent developers based on a single aspect of their work that I never rely on anyway :)

You can constantly complain about something that is never going to change, or you can simply take account of it when making decisions.

>> Why should we have to apply a factor to a person who is in a professional position but is not acting in a professional manner...Especially when that factor can be anywhere from 2 months to 5 years!]

Newsflash - the world isn't fair, the stock marker is actively against you and at some point, you have to accept people for who they are - not who you would like them to be.

You have a simple choice. A) Avoid XTR because the CEO is bad at setting dates, or B) invest in XTR because its a great investment despite the CEO being bad at setting dates.

However, choosing B) with the knowledge that the CEO is bad at setting dates and then complaining for years that the CEO is bad at setting dates seems like a good way to cause yourself frustration.

>> "They aren't actually deadlines in any real sense - nothing is hanging on a specific date." Steve, perhaps not for the company or you but that is not necessarily true for all investors. Some of us have other commitments, investments and opportunities...

I am plainly not making my point very well :)

I realise everyone has their own timeframes. All I am saying is we all KNOW that CB is terrible at setting target dates. He almost always misses the dates he sets because he is too optimistic. He is 78ish so he is not going to change. So why does everyone assume that this time it is different. Its like Lucy moving the football when Charlie Brown tries to kick it. Why get frustrated about missing a date when you knew up front it was almost certain to be wrong.

All I am saying is just ignore the dates that CB provides. Do your own research, use RNS to track actual progress and make your own estimates on timeframes. Then you can make decisions on your other 'commitments, investments and opportunities' without relying on an arbitrary date that you KNOW is probably wrong.

@Gixxer-600

Please don't take this the wrong way, but if you have such a bad view of the CEO, why have you stayed here so long? It seems you have a generally pessimistic view of the company. I'm not accusing you of de-ramping because I know you are invested and I know you are genuinely frustrated. However, presenting a consistently negative view of the company and the CEO to current or potential shareholders is not going to help your investment. There are many good reasons to be invested in XTR, despite CB's continual missing of his own target dates, but the latter is what you seem to focus on.

I've been here only about 18 months, so I can only judge on that period. There have been two raises, quite early in that period, both of which seemed to have been used effectively. CB said in the June 28th statement last year that there would be no raises for 12 months and he has kept his word on that.

I am happy in general with progress on both BR and Manica during my time at XTR, although I would like to know more about what is happening at Eureka. Things may have gone better, but they could have also gone considerably worse. Overall, the good news has far outweighed the bad. Its hard to see much of a downside here over the longer-term and the financial situation suggests no further raises, so I am quite happy to give CB whatever times he needs until the situation with BR is resolved.

At some point, you have to look on events from years ago as water under the bridge, or they will forever taint your view of any positive events. CB is just terrible at giving time estimates. You have to accept/ignore that or it will just be an endless source of frustration in what otherwise seems to be a good investment.