Member Info for Steve4077

It looks like the MMs are continuing to make odd decisions with the ask dropping despite far larger buys than sells. However, I'm not sure why that helps them.

I can understand dropping the bid and ask to provoke sells, but it plainly isn't working so they are just handing out cheap shares. I guess I should stop trying to assign logic to every action :)

Yes, since the price dropped to 5.10, there have been 7 trades for 340k total shares, all buys :)

And now a 4k share sale at 5.06.

I think it is about to reverse and go back up.

Yes, very odd on level 2 at the moment. Almost all buys, apart from a few tiny sells, yes the price continues to gradually fall. I think they are trying to provoke sells.

Best sentence in the RNS for me was:

"It has passed through a wide outer alteration zone typical of such porphyry-style deposits as it progresses towards the core of the mineralised system"

That seems to suggest it hasn't hit the core yet.

Weird happenings on L2. The MMs dropped the bid immediately after the RNS without any selling pressure. Probably trying to scoop up the usual 'sell on news' shares.

>> the hole went much deeper - see for example this diagram:

Thanks - that is what I was looking for.

>> Anyone know when the assays are due back?

The lab assay, including gold contents, will take several week. Maybe even a couple of months.

>> News is correct: the relationship between (average) grade and unit production cost is complex"

@Shurething. I was the one stating the relationship was complex. News was stating that 100m at 3.6 was equivalent to 1000m at 0.36. Anyway - I think we have done that to death so probably best to drop it :)

The pre-XTR drills were relatively shallow. The 159m at 0.4% cu and 0.2 g/t gold ended at 306m and the 169m at 0.4% and 0.1 g/t ended at 486m. The current drilling, both BRDD-20-001 and BRDD-21-002, are aiming much deeper because the previously identified resource was open-ended at depth, so there is plenty of potential scope for significant, completely new resource to be added.

It is really very interesting, but I can see why PI who aren't prepared to invest the time to learn the detail might not appreciate what XTR has found.

Answering myself :) I realise now you do mean a pre-XTR drill. ProspectOre BRD001 from the April 2020 presentation. Where is the info about the extra 500m after the 159m at 0.4%?

Are you talking about a pre-XTR drill here, as you mentioned gold and we don't have the assays yet? Or do you mean BRDD-20-001?

The latter had 900m at 0.2% and above, according to the 25th January RNS: "The data from the handheld XRF indicates that copper mineralisation occurs over a downhole depth of 905m with copper grades ranging from 0.2% to 0.5% Cu."

OK, after this reply I will stop replying to your posts as you are plainly treating my attempts to help as some sort of attack. I agree that you are posting facts. However, I've tried to explain my point about presenting a mid-range view vs best possible interpretation (based on the same facts) several times and I am obviously banging my head against the wall. I'll try one last time then give up.

I'm director of analytics for a multi-billion dollar global company, so my job is, inter alia, to take factual information and make predictions about the future with very large amounts of money at stake. 'Facts' can be interpreted in a lot of different ways, especially regarding their influence on future events. We have to go to the market each year and quarter and provide forecasts for our revenue, etc. and I am heavily involved in those revenue models.

If I took the best possible interpretation of the facts, then we would always aim high in those market projections and almost always miss the targets, with resulting damage to our share price. The first year we were a public company, I wasn't involved and someone did exactly that. Our results were fine in reality, but the massively optimistic forecast resulted in a billion dollar reduction in market cap. The business wasn't the problem - its was the expectation we set.

Bear in mind that when new people arrive at the forum, they will be most impressed by an informed debate about a range of potential outcomes based on the available facts. They will be less impressed by someone trying to use those same facts to present the best possible outcome and that may affect their view of the company. The company looks amazing. There is zero need to oversell.

>> What sort of, erm, club is it ......?

Its cheap entry and big prizes, but you have to pass a geology test and a reading comprehension test before you are allowed in :)

@news I understand you were trying to explain the benefit of the huge potential volume of Bushranger and that the grades are less important than that volume as long as they are economic. However, using a 10x intersection length with 10% of grade is not a valid comparison for a number of reasons, based on geology, extraction costs, depth, etc.

With XTR, we have something potentially amazing. However, you may put off reasonable investors from investigating further if you look like you are ramping. I know that is not your intention, but please try to look at a reasonable middle ground and not the best possible interpretation of everything. Setting high expectations that are then missed will cause far more damage than reasonable expectations that are exceeded.

You can't compare 100m @3.6g/t au GOLD to 1000m at 0.36 g/t. The former would be much easier to mine and extract. The problem for the GGP is the depth. 111.7 METRES @3.6g would be amazing close to surface. The problem for GGP is that it only starts at 800m+, making it a significant challenge to extract.

>> for me this is in the screaming buy zone now.

Your whole posts sums up my feelings exactly :)

There was an uncrossed trade at 4.4, so that will be closing price. A little annoying as there were no trades at that level for over two hours (apart from the usual tiny MM trades of a few hundred shares).

Anyway, short-term share price aside, I suspect the long-term trend is still very much upwards.

Yes, I am seeing that too on II. 4.41 to sell. 4.407 to buy :)

@news I am not de-ramping here. I think this will do really well. I am just trying to ensure the share price isn't damaged by creating unrealistic expectations. The reasonable expectations are still really good!

Based on the previous studies prior to XTR taking over, 0.2% was considered an economic grade if the copper price was $7500 and 0.15% was economic with a copper price of $10,000. Therefore, for the purposes of setting a reasonable expectation lets use 0.2%.

However, bear in mind that all of this discussion is assuming no gold. If we get even half-decent gold results (and the geology suggest at least that), then the Cu equivalent goes up significantly and even the sub 0.2% might be economic. We just need to wait for the assays in a few weeks to know for sure.

I think its more a tussle between the moderate bulls and the optimistic bulls, with the occasional misinformed bear growling from the sidelines :)