Member Info for Steve4077

When I went to night clubs in the 80s, my friend and I were on a tight budget. After we got kicked out at about 2am, we could usually afford either a taxi or a burger from the local van followed by a six mile walk home. The burger usually won :)

Hi all. Quick drive by as I couldn't resist the below.

"I personally did not read what he wrote"
" all you lot got sucked in to his phoney analysis."

Everyone who read the analysis and agreed has sold up and left. Anyone who didn't agree held on to their shares and stayed. As you didn't read it, your assessment of the analysis must be based entirely on the people who stayed. Sound logic!

"Yep Steve4077 analysis on the Jorc announcement had a horrendous effect for those that sold their holding in XTR"

Yes, terrible. All those people who sold at 2.5p could now buy back in at 1.8p (if they wanted to).

Just as an aside, were you aware you can invest in ETFs that move up and down at triple the change in the copper price. No placings, no guesswork and no misleading interviews. No one is ramping or de-ramping because it has zero effect. If you believe in copper, just invest on the price alone and gain multiples. I'm not going to mention specific ETFs but they are not hard to find.

Same on Interactive Investor. Can't even buy 1000 shares.

Today we dropped 11.7%. If you only look at price, that looks like a major drop and could lead to concern. However, look at volume and its a very different story.

Only 434k shares were traded, including both buys and sells. That means for every 283 shares held at the start of the day, only 1 was traded. 99.65% of shares didn't move. That doesn't suggest a problem with funding.

Market Makers only make money if trading takes place. Because the PXC shares are tightly held and the free float is low, they have to move it a lot to generate trading, either by catching stop-losses or causing fear. If you are well-researched and have conviction for the longer term, it should not be anything other than a top-up opportunity.

Price is down 4% at the moment based on volume of 73k shares traded. There are 123m shares in issue, so that is 1 share traded today for every 1700 held (including buys). I don't think that should lead to any concern about a sell-off.

Not sure even Disco knows what he is on about :)

There were 2m warrants associated with the placing of 35m shares two years ago, but only that is less than 2% potential dilution, they don't have to be exercised until March 2024, they have to exercised above 38.5p and all that assumes they haven't already been exercised in the two years since the placing.

Down 9% today at one point, but on tiny volume. Currently less than 0.3m traded, including buys, with 123m shares in issue. Or put another way, 1 share traded for every 430 held.

Now its a case of timing the buys :)

"Grammar, sentence/paragraph structure and object in a sentence are things journos of today have no education in."

That should be "Grammar, sentence/paragraph structure and object in a sentence are things in which journos of today have no education." - try to avoid prepositions at the end of sentences please.

Sorry - couldn't resist :)

>> this is going nowhere and just treading water.

Its up over 20% in a month. I need more investments that are 'treading water'.

>> Do I ride the remaining 3.2M I hold into the ground as seems likely or grow a set and see what happens?

I posted this earlier on Telegram, but it seems an appropriate response to the above question.

If you step back from this, there is still a scoping study with 114% IRR in the first two years. There is gold in the ground and an active mine. The company, its creditors and it future finance partners are all in this to make money.

Yes, there are problems - quite a few of them - but unless you think the company will go bust then at some point the problems are priced in. It is definitely not without risk because it could still go off the rails. However, if you look at the potential upside from this point if financing is sorted, it looks like a lot more than the potential downside and probably more likely too.

All investing is a gamble, so you do your research, accept the risks and place your bets

Posted by BushyTailed: 18 Jan 2023 13:44

"Sold out ... 200 day failed on overbought indicators. Positive licence update could catch sellers out if you're not active enough to jump back in."

Probably should have taken your own advice. In meantime, please show a little character.

Is there an SHG Telegram group?

Thanks - PM Sent.

>> Wow steve lol not invested but watching 24/7

Not really :) I noticed the price move up (one on a long watchlist) and popped on to see if anything was going on. I just happened to visit at an opportune moment.

No, not me :)

Could someone point me to a link for the Telegram group please?

When I start getting nervous about the drop, I revisit the scoping study from just three weeks ago, which is based on a gold price of $1650 (Gold price is currently $1880+)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/GCAT/scoping-study-delivers-robust-project-economics-ycuxb0h35zhj5tj.html

"Robust economics with upside to expand production (post tax, based on a gold price ofUS$1,700/oz for 3 months and then US$1,650/oz for remaining 10 years)
· 114% internal rate of return ('IRR')
· 2-year payback period
· US$12.6m first full year free cash flow ('FCF')
· US$118m FCF over life of mine ('LOM')
· US$1095/oz all-in sustaining costs ('AISC')
· 10-year life of mine
· 24,000oz pa average production
· US$19,7m pre-production capital (including mining pre-production & continued)"

114% IRR and the projected FCF for year 1 is higher than the current market cap! No wonder the finance companies are queuing up and the traders / de-rampers are out in force :)

>> Even then Swampy it the SP will bounce around like ADHD Kangeroo.

That is an image I am now struggling to get out of my head. Thanks :)

>> The flaw in the due diligence is that it's based upon projected production rates and not current, which couldn't stack up to scrutiny

Feeble de-ramp. As stated in the RNS and the interview, all due diligence was passed. The issue was a legal problem where the government couldn't sign-off on the licence being held as a security (as that was against Kenyan law). Still annoying as it should have anticipated, but nothing to do with company production or due diligence.

Or even naivety - not a good look when I incorrectly post a spelling correction :)