Member Info for theiceberg

Very true imo, esg is vital for these companies going forward...not a year or 2 down the line but 2030 onwards. If they want to claim there esg certificate of approvals ,for example they simply can't mine projects in africa, which have huge impacts and are powered by fossil fuels, require 300-400miles of road to be built etc.
It's why BR will be sought after imo. We've got a mega high voltage power line going through the BR license, xxx company can simply buy in renewable energy from the grid, do some carbon capture and get a ready, not c.f. And easy carbon neutral mine without much effort.

My apologies if I misunderstood. I thought you were saying that the XRF represented the best grades. Hence the assays will be lower. If that's not what you meant by "xrf.... are supposed to represent the highlights of those drills, then the AVERAGE come in less than 0.3% to 0.5%?" Then sorry...
My point was simply the xrf does NOT represent the best of anything, it's just a method of testing a 2p area every 33cm.

I like to think the results were good, and they got a little carried away and wanting to demonstrate at least a low case scenario. :)

Where they would be used is to determine vein mineralisation...i.e you perform a guesstimate of vein percentage in a core. You determine under microscope, that a vein contains 60% quartz and 40% chalcopyrite. You then xrf the vein and you can determine that the chqlcopyrite contains 25% copper.
So for more rapid processing of cores, you could perform a quick calculation and say that each 1% of veining gives you roughly 0.1% copper. If they see 3% veining that would indicate .3% copper.
The problem is that you won't see all the veins nor veinlets, and certainly not the lose fine grained copper minerals.
Who knows what the assays will be! But that's why the price is 7p and not 15p!

Steve this is taken from the RNS "Hand-held XRF readings of the copper mineralisation were taken on the basis of three readings per one metre interval along the entire length of drill hole BRDD-20-001"
They can't cherry pick the best bits as that would be illegal to report...there has to be a logical approach.
The xrf will give an indicative sample, but my point was that it s wrong to say that logically the xrf will provide the best case grades, it wont. It's likely to under play them, which is why the xrf grades for hole 1 were so good.
It was useful info imo.

It's not really logical 're the xrf. If they took samples every 30cm then that might actually miss most of the veins. Equally sometimes they might hit it and get a better than avg result, but more time than not it will be worse. Equally the copper might be fine grained and difficult to pick up like the gold.
Think about it logically you got a 1m, 6cm core , split in half to give you 2x 100x6cm rectangles and your only testing the equivalent of 3 or 4, 2p pieces. A quick calculation is less than 5% of each core.

As I posted at the weekend. Anglo commission mason geo services to re-examine the 2014drill results and he identified 2 porphyry systems in an internal report.
"Porphyry 2: Kspar+Plagioclase+Biotite-phyric Dacite Porphyry
This distinctive porphyry unit is present in TBRC030 @ 315.8m in contact with volcaniclastic
sandstone, and @329.6m, and@335.2m), in BRC032 @ 221.8m and @217.65 where it clearly
intrudes the monzonite), and in BRC034 (@ 169.3m, and @224.4m where it occurs in contact
with Porphyry 1). It also occurs in hole RACED020 where it is clearly intruding a volcaniclastic
siltstone.

This porphyry is distinctive in having large (to almost 1cm long) blocky Kspar phenocrysts that
often include one or more small plagioclase phenocrysts."

The problem is that they never tested the second one that extended from the north. Due to the falling price of copper they stopped exploration and farmed it out.
Now AA have no pipestream of copper projects none JS once the S.American comes online next year.
They also have a terrible political risk profile.

An honest view.
A little disappointed that mineralization didn't extend a bit more....but that still gives us 800m of it.
This is still ALL NEW mineralization.
It looks like they want to step out another 80-100m from where the core was intercepted with hole 5.

Each drill is adding huge tonnage to the eventual jorc.

I do wonder whether Colin is preparing for a news bomb.
Start with news on africa.
Then follow-up with first assay hole 1.
Then drop the Mic with a hole 5 1000m mineralization, dual porphyry and "the geologist said that hole 5 is better mineralization than hole 1"

The first 2 clears out any traders and raises the sp to 9-10p, then the last puts it to 12p+

're chk it's a different kind of mineralization i.e an IOCG, rather than a straight forward copper gold porphyry and associated alteration zone.
're what makes good grades...to answer that would take several books, but in short: The depth of the mineralization is important, the reliability is important..all things that effect the cost of getting it out the ground.
Again 're chk it's ONLY at depth which is bad. It's over a metre or so which is bad.
For xtr you are looking for commercial mineralization as shallow as possible, once we have that you want it to go down as far as possible. If your got bulk to last 20 years of mining, a company would be more likely put the effort into mining it.
If you've got 1000m you can mine, you will have bulk.
After that you need it to be commercial , at current prices that's about .2% copper equivalent...so that's the first test. This can be just copper or a mixture of copper and gold.
Companies also like a high grade component. Which might be 0.5 cu eq...this is a zone they can mine first. It then allows them to pay off the upfront cost of the mine (capex) ..how quickly they pay this off is called the IRR...my gut tells me guaranteed would have an ODD of around 50%, which means the capex would be paid off in 2 years...
After that, it's just keeping it running and taking in the money.
My suggestion would be look up porphyry, capex, IRR, look at average grades, look at 'Rio tinto winu' which it's rios flagship copper exploration target in australia.

"It looks like a sizeable sell to me at around 7.6 at around 8.50/8.55am. which will be a delayed trade. "
And there we go.
Delayed trades now gone through, between 8.52 and 8.55 we have nearly 900k shares from 7.65 to 7.53. Looks like a mixture of trades. Maybe isa and cgt related, but it's given the opportunity to buy at 7.7.

Looks like they are getting through those 7.7 shares. One market maker down and 7.5 has strengthened.

It looks like a sizeable sell to me at around 7.6 at around 8.50/8.55am. which will be a delayed trade. I don't think its a huge sell, but it probably enough to push the Market Makers to offload at 7.7.

Its not a news sell, so it likely to be a T20 or something that simply hasnt been rolled over.

Just IMO.

The beauty of the lowering volume, the buy raised the price by about 5%. Very few traders and pumpers to squeeze. Today was the lowest volume Since the sub 2p days, so more buyers wanting a piece and the upward trend will only increase. :)

Was about to post this...the highest sell price this afternoon, it's just slowly improving, while the about to buy at 7.8 or below has been rapidly going down...

Maybe tomorrow, but I think a fair chance today.
"Minor mineralisation from 140-380m.
Outer Alteration zone 380m - 500m.
Inner Alteration zone 500m - 900m. - with a very high grade core at about 650-850m.
outer alteration zone again 900m -1200m"

The above are my calculations on the drill, Again a quick calculation gives the depth reached today at 650-700m. So we might well get an RNS saying they have gone through xxxx and hit the intrusion.

The DD for arcm, will be mainly political, legal and a bit around ownership etc. They will be looking at potential tax regimes, how they can export the product etc, but most external.
None of that really applies to bushranger, they have done a detailed environmental report already in 2014-2015, looking at native sites etc etc. So the externals are done, it will be the internals of the new finds, which they would want to be independently assessed. Maybe 3 months for that?

There difference with arcm - is that AA don't need to do DD...They know the prospect better than xtr ! I believe that Kirsty the chief geo for AA at bushranger still works for them. They put over a decade into guaranteed and will be kicking themselves that they missed it.

All volume is tasty today, nice and low - traders and dampers largely departed and the share price ready for 8p plus...

Thanks, that ties in with what i read, they did a bit of topside investigation and a single drill.(I think)
Its funny that alot of the work in that license area, was to the south of the main road and in the SE of the area.
AA came along and did more work, but never drilled north above the main clearing.
It all supports the view that hole 5 is drilling into a northern extension(virgin ground) and has intersected the intrusion alteration that everybody was looking for.
Up to our ownership, quite a few geo's have looked at it and come to differing conclusions, but for AA the final conclusion was that they didn't have a good understanding, they thought something more significant might be there, but really failed to find it(probably as they didn't drill the extension and deeper areas).
They passed it onto prospect, and thought you guys give it a go, as we don't want to spend any more money.

We've been lucky imo, as the geo of the area has greatly increased since AA gave it up, allowing us to drill, expand and find what now looks to be similar to many of the assets found since 2015.

There is a major river, quite a way to the South of RC, plus 3 boreholes, which are useful to measuring and maitaining water quality. A few creeks etc pass pretty close to RC, and these will need to be carefully managed.
However companies spend millions and sometimes a year or more drilling boreholes, measuring the water table etc for their EIS. All the work is pretty much done for RC. Its just risk mitigation.

I didn't realise that Newmont have been investigating Racecourse in the past, but it looks like AA came in a few months after their report was finished.
Also interestingly, AA in 2014 comissioned a report from Mason Geo consultants that clearly talks about 2 porphyrys at Race Course. The second just scrapped by AA and deeper and in their opinion better.

"Porphyry 2: Kspar+Plagioclase+Biotite-phyric Dacite Porphyry
This distinctive porphyry unit is present in TBRC030 @ 315.8m in contact with volcaniclastic
sandstone, and @329.6m, and@335.2m), in BRC032 @ 221.8m and @217.65 where it clearly
intrudes the monzonite), and in BRC034 (@ 169.3m, and @224.4m where it occurs in contact
with Porphyry 1). It also occurs in hole RACED020 where it is clearly intruding a volcaniclastic
siltstone.

This porphyry is distinctive in having large (to almost 1cm long) blocky Kspar phenocrysts that
often include one or more small plagioclase phenocrysts."

It looks like as Bird Said - most of the exploration to date was at 0-250m, a few holes went from 250-400m and i can find 2 holes at racecourse that went deeper to 700m.

Nobody has drilled as deep and as much as we have....
Most of the historic drilling was to the south of the JORC area..