Member Info for TakingMyTime

Personally I expect the indicated amount in the PFS to be smaller than the last MRE but the total MRE (indicated + inferred) to be marginally larger than the last one.

I expect another increase in December but not as big as some others here think. I will be happy if they are right and I am wrong.

I do not expect the really large increases in the MRE to come until the exploration decline is completed, and they can drill from underground rather than going through the cover. Infill drilling from the decline for the purpose of proving up further expansions to the MRE will be much more efficient.

Many shareholders would like the focus to be on expanding the MRE to boost the SP. The company's focus should be, and appears to be, on ticking the boxes for approval to mine and getting ore out of the ground. The current 4.2 moz is actually enough to keep us going for several years, it doesn't need to be proved up beyond that for some time to come. At this point I believe it makes more sense to focus on growth drilling (and trying to find out if there are actually edges to this thing short of the Indian Ocean) than on infill drilling to try to expand the MRE.

The biggest hole to my way of thinking on this is that I don't think Bamps entirely agrees with me, and he's obviously a lot more knowledgeable about mining than I am.

@Kallu "And then we can debate the precise figures etc."

1. I'm beginning intensive ministry training in two weeks and I'm dropping out of share discussions at that point if not sooner, so I'll pass on the discussion.
2. I will say that since no one knows the future, "precise figures" as to share valuations, especially as share prices are largely forward-looking, are a fiction. No one knows what revenues will be like. No one knows if there will be another pandemic or not, or whether there will be a huge pushback (already manifesting a lot of places) against lockdowns and mask mandates. No one knows what the effect of the massive deficit spending is going to be. And so on....

I bought at about 2080 because I believed the LT value was at least 30% higher than that.

I would probably sell around 2800 because I'm not sure how high the value is or will be and I am entering a phase of my life where I don't want to or need to be spending time researching shares. So I'm going to be paying less attention. So if we reach a price where I'm no longer certain it is undervalued, I will just take profit.

I'm pretty sure anything up to somewhere around 2800 is undervalued. Beyond that, I'm not as sure. So if we hit that level, I'll either need to double down on research to re-evaluate and decide whether I still think it is undervalued or not, or sell. Other life ramifications will dictate that the decision would be to sell.

If Primark is booming by that point and anyone with half a brain can see that it's worth 3500 or more, that might change my mind. But right now, my view is that up to 2800 we are clearly undervalued, above that it is not so clear.

If I were intending to stay an active investor my answer might be different.

@Kall, I bought into ABF in late December 2018 when the SP dropped below 2100. Seemed too good to pass up. Obviously, if I'd known what was coming I could have taken profits at 2500 and then bought back in when it dropped again, but none of us knows the future.

I could hold this for up to 15 years but I probably won't. It's in a SIPP so it is a LTH hold for me. I suspect if we hit 2800 or so I'll cash out.

@Bunky, yes, I'm well under 75. Unfortunately my tax and pension affairs are extremely complicated due to being in the process of changing residence from the UK.

For those with more straightforward affairs, it's good to be alerting them to the ramifications of LTA and other SIPP/tax interactions. It's always unfortunate to pay more tax than necessary simply because of ignorance of the rules. Thanks for your comments.

As some will remember, I said a while back I'd be giving my GGP shares to my offspring. I've just pulled the trigger on that. It will probably show as sales and buys though maybe not for a day or two, so volume may be a little inflated, it's really just transferring from my accounts to my kids'.

I am pretty well convinced that this SP is going to take off before long. (I've said that before and shocked everyone because it's not my usual way of writing.) It hasn't happened yet but that doesn't dissuade me. At some point I expect traders to pile in before the PFS, so we might see a surge before the PFS and then perhaps even a drop afterwards as they take profits.

So I made the move now because the higher the SP the more significant the tax ramifications. From now on, tax on gains in the SP are a problem for my kids, not for me.

I still hold GGP in my SIPP, can't give those away and certainly not selling them at this price. But the ISAs and trading account are cleared.

GLA.

"one should not buy an investment they are not willing to hold for a decade or more."

This would lock out anyone over the age of 70 from investing, and many people as they approach retirement. It's simply not sound investment strategy.

It's entirely appropriate to have a mix of short term, medium term, and long term investments.

"There's still many abusive posters on this BB."

I know. I don't know why it is allowed. I have some people in my filter bin who actually sometimes provide good analysis / research, simply because I got tired of reading some of the things they wrote to other posters.

@Freddie "Ha ha yes tmt but i am very rarely abusive , perhaps thats why"

And thus your straw man is fully revealed in all his glory. People tend to get banned because they are abusive, not because they express contrary views. Codders got by expressing contrary views for quite a while but he was abusive often enough that I'm pretty sure that's what got him banned. If he had been consistently respectful to others in the way he presented his views, he'd probably still be here. And it's because he wasn't that a long thread rejoicing in his demise appeared. He offended a lot of people.

(Just figure out how to change your "very rarely" into "never" and you'll have accomplished something more important than investment success. ATB)

"If you delete or filter or ban everyone with opposing views"

A bit of a straw man there, Freddie. You've expressed contrary views to the majority here at times, and you are still here.

"Did you invest in ABF without researching competition?"
Depends on what you mean by "researching". Did I look at the general market to see who was out there, and their products, and whether market share was likely to increase, decrease, or stay stable? Of course.

Did I research whether BOO had good financials, investigate their management to figure out whether I trusted them to properly manage a company I part own, investigate whether I had ethical concerns with their current approach and direction, try to place a value on them and figure out whether I thought they were undervalued or overvalued? No, I didn't do any of that.

But of course, one of the reasons I liked ABF was that it isn't just Primark. It's Primark that makes me think there's solid growth opportunity, especially if they succeed in the US at all comparably to how they succeeded in Britain. But there's also the rest of the company, which continued to be profitable through lockdowns. With ABF you have diversification. I liked that.

So, I never really considered BOO as an investment. Not because I didn't think it might be profitable and perhaps even more profitable. I think they've done an excellent job of gaining market share, though I'm not persuaded that will continue to grow. I don't know that. But I don't know anything about the company beyond that, really. Never bothered to find out.

Hope that answers your question.

Why debate either place? If someone is posting lots of off-topic stuff over there, posting about Primark on Boo board, report him. Off-topic posting is against the site rules.

Or filter him if you don't want to see it.

Hi, spoon. No one knows, it's a total guess at this point.

Probably the biggest unknown is the byproduct impact. The copper (and other byproducts, if any) will be treated as a credit against the AISC. Since Cadia produces loads of Cu, and since the price of Cu is soaring, it has reduced Cadia's AISC to negative at times -- the copper revenue from Cadia is greater than the cost of production.

I don't expect Havieron to produce as much copper as Cadia. It's possible mining costs will be lower than Cadia simply because NCM is always getting better and better at what they do. There will be extra transport costs, etc, compared to Cadia simply because Havieron is much more remote. There is also the cost of transporting the ore to Telfer, that's going to be important.

There's also an unknown which either hasn't been decided or hasn't been reported -- toll processing fees. NCM owns the plant at Telfer and they won't be providing it for free. The fact that it is there means no massive CAPEX to build one, but the JV will be paying NCM a nice fee for processing the ore. That will also be included in the AISC.

To my way of thinking, it is likely to be somewhere between $400-800 / oz. There are too many unknowns to get more precise than that. NCM and GGP undoubtedly have a much better idea of some of these costs than I do, so I'm sure their range of expected AISC is much narrower, but I think my numbers are pretty good. If Cu prices keep soaring, that will drop.

Also, Bamps has talked about some of the other minerals present and the possibility of recovering some of them. I've heard from other sources that is not likely to be economical. If Bamps is right, though, that would reduce AISC further by providing further byproduct credits.

The PFS may give a little more info about some of this and help us narrow the range.

Ah, so this really isn't about ABF at all. Ok.

Don't really understand why people go posting on a share that they aren't invested and aren't thinking about investing, but whatever. Good luck to all investors in both shares. I don't see any reason to doubt my investment in ABF. Haven't researched Boo sufficiently to comment, but certainly they've had some success. It's not a company in which I wish to invest but that's not a comment about whether the case for investment is good or not.

I'm not sure they are really in competition with each other that much, they are mostly (IMO) targeting different market segments. Nor do I necessarily think it's an either/or investment proposition, I'm sure some people are happily invested in both companies.

"Sorry Spy I'm sure this is hurting you to read"
I'm sure he'll be ok, no need to apologise, LOL.

"but SP has been in a negative trend"
Absolutely undeniable.

"and its not out yet."
Absolutely unproven and actually, sheer speculation.

"Go and check.. That was November (ish) last year. In Ecuador.. With no PFS and no funding. And no infrastructure."

And no business plan or CEO worth mentioning.

I just want to say that other LTHs have posted things much more far-fetched than ColdGas did, without getting any abuse or suspicions of deramping.

Touchy board today, you'd think the price had dropped.

Honestly, you guys going after DS for saying sentiment is through the floor need to look again. Sentiment may have picked up some on this board but generally, it's through the floor as evidenced by the SP. He's correct.

The thing is, if the value proposition hasn't changed (and it hasn't), and sentiment is through the floor, then you have a buying opportunity. Sentiment being through the floor is only a problem if you need to sell. Otherwise, hold or even buy more, if it fits your investment strategy.

No long term holder should care about sentiment. You care about value. Sentiment is the concern of traders, primarily. But even a LTH can take advantage of excess sentiment in either direction, so be honest with yourself about sentiment.

GLA

My father taught me about investing before I was a teenager. He told me never to invest based on what I hoped a company would be, or thought it should be, because I wasn't going to change it. He said you invest on what a company currently is. And you invest on a company's direction, but only if what they say matches what they do -- if those don't match, you run the other way.

I think you just need to accept that ABF / Primark is what it is. If you don't like it or think it is a bad business model in today's world, you need to sell your shares and invest somewhere else. You aren't going to change the company, and you aren't going to convince those of us who see it differently by repeating the same thing.

That's the beauty of markets in the modern world. We can decide what we think the future holds and invest accordingly, and someone who views it differently can invest according to how they see it.

Good luck to you.

"I don’t think banks would be lending until they see income flowing in."

Banks will lend against income or against an asset. Not both are required. If there is an asset to secure the debt, and a relatively assured future income, banks will lend -- though the financing rate may not be as favourable as if there were current income.