Member Info for TalkingSense

Cocopops, Don't forget those revenue figure are deliberately conservative...so will be upgraded.

From Brokers note: " In reviewing the above it should be noted that several of the assumptions used by ECR are deliberately conservative. This applies particularly to the grade. The grade assumption of 0.12 g/m³ is towards the lower end of the range for alluvial gold projects. Grades >1g/m³are not unusual. It should also be noted that the Phase 1 area is relatively small and does not allow for side creeks, deeper gravels or the optimisation of mining methods. "

Also what was the absolute share valuation that the factual broker note attributed to ECR?

Are you still quoting from the Brokers note from November last year ....a month and a half before ECR finalised the deal at Raglan?...lol

I'll quote Nick from a February interview (this year)

"There is a very real and very probable outcome that Raglan will cover ALL OF OUR G&A, AND A LITTLE BIT MORE !"

So you cannot state as a fact with any evidence that Raglan will not cover G&A ....The company are of a different opinion.

"Allenby 2025" ......pmsl ....Raglan wasn't even purchased util 30th December 2025 so I don't think we can rely on that 3-4 months later as an up to date reference of today's situation.

And they are producing at Raglan....unless you have evidence that they are not processing paydirt on a daily basis?

I'm not saying they are in 'full production' on the Phase 1 riverbed as we all know that the company said it would take a couple of months to test/optimise the process so that milestone would likely be hit in Mar/Apr.....that position has been consistent since the start of the year

Coco,

Which broker note ?...dated when.

We have the X post today showing the planned testing is progessing.

The statement on 10th Feb clearly states "These test pits are expected to provide additional insight into gravel depth variability, grade distribution and potential extensions to the current mine plan, WHILST GENERATING CASH FLOW".

Generating cash flow = production.

So you cannot claim they are not in production

Not sure why Coco is posting as if ECR are lagging behind or off plan.

In the Raglan update on 10th February the company clearly stated:

"Clear Path to Expansion

Importantly, the work completed to date represents only the initial phase of mining planned at the Raglan Project. The defined area has been selected to provide a conservative, clearly delineated starting point for operations.

Over the coming weeks, the Company intends to dig and process a series of test pits at the northern end of the Raglan Project area outside of the Phase 1 area. These test pits are expected to provide additional insight into gravel depth variability, grade distribution and potential extensions to the current mine plan, whilst generating cash flow.

As mining progresses and operational data is gathered, ECR expects to refine and potentially expand the mining footprint over time, with the objective of extending mine life, increasing prospective annual gold output and enhancing overall returns from the Raglan Project."

So the company are doing exactly what they stated/ planned.

Coco, Not trolling Mike W on PYC today and decided to troll ECR again as he has a holding here?

Sad obsession....YOU have my sympathies.

Https://x.com/i/status/2033771834102161863

Progressing well at Raglan to expand the understanding (and extent) of the known resource beyond phase 1.

ECR are financially under no time pressure so can methodically work to get a full understanding of the Raglan resource for maximum return.

The impatient will sell , but LTHs will get the rewards for this more considered approach going forward.

I believe the BOD are confident their 'conservative' estimates are well below reality and Raglan will cover G&A and more (as Nick has previously stated).

The RNS this morning was just the transfer of Timor from Leviathan to AU gold Corp.

No change in the royalties structure.

A bit of non-news..... Just hope AU may get a bit of a move on proving up the resource (where Leviathan dragged their feet)so we can get some $s

Would not be surprised to see the first production figures revealed just before the investors lunch so Nick can go into it with a massive good news story .

It may come sooner though.

And they have the 26 t.p.h plant as well (although that's currently at BM)....plenty of options

SMTrading....What mine?

You don't need a mine for alluvial production....with the infrastructure jn place (as it is at Raglan) you can start production quickly..as ECR have done.

Wow, loads of green boxes today...Old Spikedboy (Failtosee) must be lashing out in every direction.....the best bit is if you green box him , he can rant and rave at you as much as he likes and you can't see it.....if everyone went to filters at the top of the 'Post a message' box and typed in Baileysea then this board would reflect real life ...he would have no-one to talk to and would just be ranting at himself.

Mind you , he's so stupid he will probably react to this post (I can't see you!)

Cocopops, It's an alluvial resource with fine grain gold so hard to get pictures of that....the fact that there are nuggets in the respurce is extremely encouraging.

And they have been operating the plant since very early in February (initially doing the required safety checks, etc.) so it was turn key.

I see a few green boxes so Failtosee is probably regurgitating the same moan about being spiked 5 years ago (I bet he's mentioned that time at least once) ...still bitter. Of course anyone who invested in the last two years, in the months it was in the 0.2 region, is around 30% up ;-)

Look like those 1.6 & 1.9m pairs of trades are Bed & ISAs

I wouldn't hang around....this could rise quickly with positive production figures thst could vome anytime. .

Triple, Keep posting...., good to have your input

Triple, Can you ask Ai to summarise the points a little more....takes an age to read through all the posts

Coco, Institutions could buy around 110m shares without having to declare on a TR1.

So you cannot state that "No institution put in money" as you have no evidence to support that statement.

Nick stated in the raise RNS ""Today's £1.5 million Fundraising is a major step forward for ECR and we are delighted by the backing received from institutional investors. This support reflects confidence in both our strategy and our progress as we establish ECR as a multi-site gold company." so I would say that this is correct unless you are accusing Nick of falsifying information in an RNS.

The tax losses are worth much more to the company as they will be producing $m's worth of gold over the coming years....and the company also has sufficient funds for planned activities (and will have additional income) and therefore has no current need for additional funds , so a sensible decision to remove them from sale.

I don't think there is much danger of that with projects at such an early stage....and the figure could be over such a wide range it's not even worth throwing a number out there.

Once Lolworth is proven up more and BM is producing then ECR may be more in the shop window , with the kicker to any buyer of the tax losses.

When we get to that stage the figure would be multiples of the current SP......but that's a year or two down the path until it's even worth speculating on IMHO.

$7m isn't the Raglan total production over it's lifespan (and where have you got 7 years from ...made up?).

That's the total for Phase 1 only which last 1-2 or 3 years with expansion into other phases following.

All your assertions therefore incorrect if you are taking $7m as all Raglan's production ever.

The company have stated production at Raglan will cover G&A and more....and you have no evidence to the contrary apart from incorrect assumptions