Member Info for stevemocal

So we are not only getting a phase 3 but phase 3 will also be testing further IP/geochemical anomalies outside the Ascot and Racecourse prospects. I thought it wasn't going to be a death of a thousand cuts... has the IP turn up some targets that appear too delicious not to dip a drill in and taste? We need CB to do an interview and fill us in on what appears to be a change of strategy.

Steve - The point of setting a 2mt threshold is to make it fair to both parties and will have been negotiated. It is high enough for AA to be pretty certain they'd be interested in reacquiring at that point, but not so high that ProspectOre would need to find tens of millions to cover explorations before they could reach target - a serious risk to a small company that never intended to mine it and whose strategy was to prove there was a beast down there and sell it on.

I'd point you again to the use of the word 'ultimately' in the sentence "If a deposit of greater than 2M tons of contained CuEq (i.e. 450Mt @ 0.45% CuEq) is ultimately identified." Take out the word 'ultimately' and you could argue that once the threshold is it reached then AA get the buy-back opportunity. But 'ultimately' is in there and I would suggest it is in there on purpose i.e. because it allows ProspectOre to continue quantifying the resource until they are ultimately ready to declare what they have identified and trigger the buy-back process.

'Ultimately' means at the end/finish of something and, surely, only Xtract can decide when they have finished their work estimating the resource at the Bushranger licence? An interim JORC estimate (even if crosses the 2mt threshold that will ultimately guarantee AA an opportunity to buy back), is just that... an interim resource estimate. I cannot see there being any triggering of the buy-back opportunity until Xtract decide that they are ready to offer it.

Come on Birdy... enough of the suspense now! New JORC and modelling please!

Steve - The key word in that RNS is 'ultimately'. Releasing a JORC estimate of 2mt+ of contained Cu Eq, will only means we have crossed the threshold that guarantees AA a buy-back opportunity. It is not a declaration of the 'ultimate' resource estimate, which is still being worked on.

The buy-back clause can only be triggered by Xtract, and when they are ready to trigger it.

The thing with adding exploration phases is that they can go on and on and ain't quick or cheap!

I recently watched a presentation by Dan Wood, who is the geologist that led the discovery team at Cadia for Newcrest (link below for anyone interested). It was very informative and what really hits home is just how long discoveries take and how expensive it is... he estimated that they spent A$900m on exploration whilst he was with Newcrest and, 30 years on, they are still exploring and, he believes, there are still major deposits to be found.

So, if Bushranger is potentially a Cadiaesque like system, the question is when will enough be enough?

I'd personally like us to stick to the plan of proving the Racecourse deposit can be economically extracted (covering a shamelessly large finders fee for Extract, the initial capex, future exploration costs and still returning a nice profit to boot) and do just enough to show Bushranger is very likely a multi (mineralised) porphyry system that the new owner can happily spend the next 30-50 years adding more and more to the resource reserve, and all from the comfort of the safest jurisdiction in the world.

We just need to show a lovely bit of thigh (Racecourse) and a glimpse of lacy knicker (Ascot and Footrot) to get potential punters salivating and reaching for their wallets. So come on CB, we know you've got the goods... flash some flesh and get Bushranger sold!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4LD9VaFIA4

The AA buyback clause relates to the EL5574 licence and the Racecourse, Ascot and Footrot deposits are all within it. Source...

https://xtractresources.com/wp-content/uploads/Bushranger-Summary-Presentation_April-2020.pdf

I agree with howezap that even if Xtract release a JORC estimate for RC of 2mt of contained Cu Eq, it would not automatically trigger the buyback clause. Xtract can keep sizing up the other deposits within the licence (and also hold onto the other neighbouring licences) until they are ready to declare what they have 'ultimately' discovered. Personally, I think there is too much risk in the world at the moment and I'd prefer Xtract to bank the Bushranger asset sooner rather than later.

Ben - Firstly, it wasn't me that sold! But I have added to my holding with some money that became for a short term(ish) investment. Perhaps the seller is in a similar position and needed the money back... we all have different circumstances.

The fact is that we were told that XTR was to complete the modelling by the end of May and would be presenting to AA. The target date has been and gone, we've had radio silence from CB ever since, and investor nerves are now jangling. Whilst the vast majority of shareholders are holding tight, it is also plain to see they are not adding. If the most knowledgeable shareholders don't have the confidence to add at these super low prices, then it is no wonder no new blood is being drawn and the SP is where it is. We are in irons and going nowhere until we get some news to renew the confidence.

Cygnus - Without sophisticated modelling software and all the raw data, all anyone can really do is stick a finger in the air!

I think our finger in the air estimates re value (based on what we currently know) are actually very similar. I still believe though that Ascot has the potential to eclipse Racecourse and for Footrot to provide some additional icing on the cakes.

Cygnus - I can't see Racecourse being less than 1.5mt. And then Ascot and Footrot need to be factored in (even if fairly heavily discounted), which should boost the amount significantly.

I'd also add another step in your calculation, which is to knock off 20% because that is what XTR keep. If they want our 20% as well, then we're not going to sell it 'at cost' and can name our own price. So we should add a substantial premium to the calculation for that.

And let's also not forget that we also hold the neighbouring licences that are not subject to the buy back clause. XTR get to name their price for those too and if we can't get a huge premium for them, then we should keep them and start exploring!

The ups and downs of the SP over the last year or so have, understandably, taken it's toll on shareholder confidence re the potential value of the Bushranger project. However, I personally think the consensus has become way too negative and the potential reward remains much higher than most would now settle for. Come on comrades... chins up!

The last assay results didn't show the risk of exploratory investment or that anything has gone wrong. They simply showed we'd found the southern limit of the Racecourse deposit. No exploration project ever ends without encountering low grades/mineralisation at the outer limits of the deposit.

For me, the silence from CB is absolutely deafening and I am not as sure as others that plan A (quick sale) is not still on the cards... I hope it is anyway. Whist the current global insecurities and challenges may impact the price we can obtain for Bushranger, the fact is things could get a lot worse before they get better and last a lot longer than people think. I think it is time to start winding up and to hang the 'for sale' sign up.

It is also nearly 6 weeks since any genuine new news from Bushranger… they must be a stockpile of news re drill holes, assays and the IP survey.

Throw us a bone CB!

Knowing when to stop is the hallmark of a great artist... so when to stop?

The concern with stopping too soon is that we don't get fair value for Ascot, Footrot and other prospects yet to be even named! But here is where the 80/20 buy back clause could work to our advantage. AA, and any independent expert valuer, are likely to base their 80% value almost exclusively on the deposits with a JORC compliant resource estimate i.e. Racecourse. But that doesn't mean XTR has to do the same when it comes to valuing their remaining 20% stake. XTR can put its' own price tag on that and that can include a premium for deposits that are not measured but strongly indicate the buyer would be getting a Cadiaesque multi-porphyry system. Of course, we need to whet their appetite we some evidence of the potential, but that won't require a 'death by a thousand cuts' exploration programme.

I think we are close to stopping and I am even hopeful that XTR may have already begun informal discussions with AA.

AIMHO.

Andy - I wish you'd volunteer to help Xtract with it's comm's.

JDAU - Without good comm's keeping the SP strong, and a well thought out exit strategy for Bushranger, Xtract is vulnerable to being held over a barrel and shafted sideways. I'd be more than happy if they paid someone £100+k to avoid that.

CB has done a great job getting us this far but he is simply spread too thin and needs support.

I said yesterday that the poor comm's has knocked at least 25% off the SP... make that 40% now. "Jeez" sums it up.

If Carlsberg did complaining... they still wouldn't be anywhere near as good at it as Pops! We are about to hit the complaining afterburner!!

Steve - For every post complaining about the comm's, there is a post to explain/excuse it. 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! ;)

Steve - The issue is not that CB is a villain or the lack of comm's.... the problems is a lack of quality comm's and broken promises. 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)? If you say you are going to do something and then don't, then that comm's was bad comm's because it causes investor concern and has a negative impact the SP... as we can see.

howzap - None of us have seem the actual buy back terms and everything you say is speculation. I personally do not believe there is a lawyer in all Australia that would allow their client to sign a contract that compelled them to sell back an asset they were buying before they were ready to start the negotiations. I also do not believe CB needs to be holding news like IP surveys and drill pad approvals close to his chest prior to the negotiation (what advantage would it give?) and would go as far to say that doing so would be in breach of AIM rules.

The issue, as I see it, is simply unchecked enthusiasm and a lack of capacity to sufficiently think about/prepare the comm's. I would like to see some support brought in as it wouldn't need to cost a lot but would make a big difference in terms of investor confidence and the SP.

howezap - How can you say there is no reason to assume CB is "up to his old tricks" when we have seen countless missed timelines and promises not delivered over the last 18 months or so... are they not the "old tricks"?

My problem with CB is not that I think he is a dishonest person , just that I think he is a bit too enthusiastic at times and has spread himself too thin across a lot of companies. As such, we are lucky to have a great team working for us down under, which is why the progress at BR is as impressive as you point out. In fact, introducing shareholders to that team was the one truly great bit of comm's we have seen! If only he could delegate someone else to come up with and manage an actual comm's strategy with the aim of looking after the SP on behalf of shareholders. I honestly believe we should be sitting comfortably at 6+p right now and that the poor comm's alone has wiped at least 25% off the value of this share. Far from de-ramping... I'm pulling my hair out that this fantastic opportunity is not being presented properly to the market and is therefore so undervalued.

Guys - There is over-promising on timescales and then there is not releasing appropriate news to the market... which is also a problem.

The RNS dated 31st May was obviously intended to meet the timescale for providing what CB alluded to being an 'AA ready' report/presentation on the BR asset. What we got was nothing of the sort, was all old news and was not RNS worthy. Obviously, the BR assets just keeps getting bigger so why not just update with news that phase 2 drilling is be extended because they system is even bigger than they thought... what shareholder is going to complain about that?

But then there are other promises not kept and RNS worthy news being sat on. Where are the IP survey results that were going to sharpen the picture? And where is the updated drill plan that would be informed by the geophysics, and news of the associated drill pad approvals? If you promise it and then don't provide it (despite shareholders knowing it must be done), then it is only going to result in negative speculation i.e. isn't the news good?

Maybe (hopefully) there is master plan and good reason for delays and sitting on information. But until such a plan is revealed, I will continue to justifiably complain about the poor comm's and pray I an eating humble pie in the not too distant future.