Member Info for Urbanracer

Spy,

Absolutely spot on. Whilst things were nice and quiet we were a happy board with loads to discuss in a generally polite manner . (I say generally). The sudden rise brought the new posters and their various agendas. I, like some others, am still very much here but have given up posting for the very reasons you outline.

England has become a very strange and hostile place.

UR

Hi Mads,

No mate they are off. Well and truly. I don’t want to post negative messages but reality is that I am beginning to worry. I actually took the time to email the company and raise a couple of points that I believe they could have answered without divulging anything sensitive. They haven’t even had the courtesy to reply.

Problem is Mads the gold price is up and this massively bolsters their case even if it is argued a percentage of the rise is short term based on current situation. If that is taken away we are still in a world circa 1400-1500 which is well above were we where when the initial base and extended cases were published. As such, surely this would have made them a far juicier target and yet we hear nothing.

As you correctly said, If we are not tempting enough, and taking as read that the yearly fundraising cannot go on ad infinitum, then we maybe we are looking at a moth-balled company. I am NOT saying this is the case but the lack of news around intent is getting to me.

All that said, maybe they will pop a few holes in, hit more au, and surprise us all with that morning suspension RNS.

If nothing move this year then I will be considering my (loss) options.

Sorry Mads but you asked!

Cheers pal.UR

Hi Mads,

Surely the ‘agreed price’ is likely to be the issue here as well as a specified timeframe. That’s why I felt a JV was more likely than OA. Quite happy to be wrong mind.

As for my early 2020 reference, I was and am expecting LND to get started within Q1 . I understood they were funded for this as don’t expect a huge amount of drilling. It’s the potential shown by positive step outs that I believe is crucial here. ( couple of deep drills showing continuing mineralisation at depth would also help).

Regards to all at Mme Una’s.

UR

Morning Mads,

Perhaps it is now ‘simply’ a question of fair price for LND v fair price for interested party.

Clearly drilling at this level by LND cannot continue ad infinitum. As such, I am not going to take that option even at 100/1.

BH is getting older and RP has gone. They have, in my view, done very very well with the BAM discovery and progression to 1 mn plus oz’s since 2016 with nailed on but as yet unknown additional au resources at Junior Lake. They will not want this dormant so not taking that one either pal.

Now then, the question of takeover v JV.

LND believe they are sat on a multi million ounce gold resource. The problem is that ‘only’ 1000000 is proven (plus nickel of course). If they let it go now it is very possible that the fair price will not go in LND’s favour.

If, however, the planned 2 or so deep drills into BAM and other drills targeting anomalies as step outs towards Lamaune are carried out first, then that will reveal a clearer (but accepted not perfect) picture.

If the results are disappointing, then perhaps the board will go ahead and try to reach an agreement based simply on what they know now. ie resource as per NI 43-101.

If, however, the early 2020 drilling reveals results that continue to match (thereabouts) the grades achieved at BAM, then it has to be concluded that LND do, indeed, have their multi million au resource. That has to put us in a completely different league entirely and massively strengthens our hand . (For any newbies...please read RNS detailing 2019 extremely promising soil sampling out to the west towards Lamaune where there are also proven 40000 ounces au and also BAM au grades that may continue and possibly improve at depth).

At this point (and I personally believe this is the point we will reach) there are three possibilities I believe.

The first is that LND are agreeable to takeover based SIMPLY ON ASSUMPTIONS that can then be made about potential amounts. Not perfect in any way but puts us in a slightly more favourable position.

The second is that LND believe there is far more upside to come. The new information has taken us over the tipping point with the third party who now agree a JV to move things on at pace to establish an MRE for full BAM to Lamaune and once reached (could be within a year with multi rigs) agree takeover.

The third option is that LND push for a JV that includes not just option 2 but an additional undertaking by JV partner to push additional exploration over the remainder of the 31 km Greenstone Belt on which Junior Lake property is sat.

My view is that option 2 is the most likely as it provides a better and fairer
balance for both companies TAKING TIME INTO ACCOUNT.

As such Mads, I am going for initial joint venture leading to takeover all within 2020.

I know Ladbrokes have not yet offered a price for that result, but, who knows.

Keep the faith Mads.

Up the LND. UR

Gents,

Wrote the below in December; it’s still an option.

I am sure that all possibilities re transport are being considered. I am not sure of build times so reckon trucks would be used in short term but dependant on how much work would be required to bring current road to Telfer up to scratch and how big Hav eventually proves to be this may be a long term consideration?

The study of many overland conveyor (OLC) vs. truck haulage reveal some basic and new facts:

1. Break even point for OLC is a transport circuit that must convey 2 million tons per annum over more than one kilometer or the total multiplier of tons and kilometers . This is further dependent on local fuel costs and terrain difficulty. Some countries subsidize their diesel fuel that artificially lowers the truck penalty - that is now changing.

2. Conveyors can often be routed in a more direct path than the road haulage thereby reducing the kilometer penalty. The path may include bridges over rivers, roads, railroads, etc.

3. Conveyors can negotiate rough terrain to 18 degrees or more making for shorter paths or that would require tunneling by trucks.

4. Conveyor are more efficient with fuel usage than trucks especially with the payload of an empty truck return haul

5. Conveyor designs have become more efficient with new rubber compounds and new design methods, that lower rolling energy by 50% or more than many suppliers of rubbers from 5 years ago. Trucks have not seen such improvements in rolling losses. A case in point is the Curragh 20 km single flight overland that transports 2500 t/h. It is light and fast (7.5 m/s). It is very light for the tons conveyed due to efficient use of sheet metal components for is idler and belt support and wind shielding. IN 2007, it was the fastest operating belt conveyor in Australia. Speed lowers the conveyor system width which is the most capital intensive parameter. Some have disparaged the design and been wrong in their assessment. It's 5 m carry side and 10 m return idler spacing is proven to be appropriate when the plant has been properly operated.

6. New research into more efficient belt conveyor operations is proving that further cost effective gains are possible compared to trucks and trains. More difficult terrain, stronger belts, lower belt strength as measured by the necessary Safety Factor, lower rolling resistance designs, and lower metal mass per km all point to ongoing improvements over truck and trains.

7. New conveyor configurations can be found with better trough shapes, pipe, and semi-pipe designs are now a reality where high lifts and sharp curvatures are required that add to belt conveyor transport efficiency.

8. Studies of +100 km conveyors does demonstrate the ability for long and efficient transport compared wih train haulage. Risk Analysis then becomes an important factor in the "what if" scenarios.

Cheers Stuart; best of luck to you also.

UR

Tell you what RTC; We have always found Reddirts views pretty accurate and to hear him say today that the interest is in Hav/Patterson and NOT the entire company will do for me.

Stuart,

For what is is worth I am with you all the way on this takeover talk. I have got fed up with it to be honest. Doubt that this will put the subject to bed though.

On a jovial point I have always loved the Havieron spelling variations so am happy to see that Scallywag is now, er, causing difficulties!

UR

Also, POG must also be coming into the equation now.

Could be Mads.

As for strategy, well we can guess but that’s all it is. Must say though, I am aware of other companies who have been involved in various types of negotiations and where there have been no leaks at all. Maybe same with LND. I mean we know there were talks with Barrick 4 or so years ago and not much happened then.

I just hope that this ongoing work towards Lamaune takes us over the line as there must be parties taking an interest here especially as LND seems to have buy me written all over it.

Or are my rose tinted specs back.

Cheers Mads

For crying out loud LND give us a clue! What is going on??

Hi Mads,

What conclusion would you draw there pal; it’s something that I hadn’t thought of even though I benefitted on a couple of occasions. I get it now and can see why both my buys were shown as sells. Surely discount does not sound good but lacking a bit of understanding here Mads. Help !!

Hi Greenmile,

Was considering this the other day as it appeared that the earlier ’6-9 months’ timeframe (approx) to maiden estimate had been extended a little by SB to ‘end 2020’.

A key issue is how much drilling has to be done before we can reasonably expect a defined Indicated Resource. Obviously, and in order to define worthwhile targets, exploration companies invest considerable resources on the initial exploration drilling program. The early widely spaced drilling results delineate exploration and can lead to an Inferred Mineral Resource. This drilling data contains information that will be used to inform additional infill drilling.

‘In addition to the critical role of modeling geological continuity, it’s also wise to use all grade information in the early stages to improve confidence intervals on expected mean grades in low and high grade areas’.

This will assist at Hav in deciding the appropriate infill drillhole spacing needed to update resource classification from ‘Inferred’ to ‘Indicated’ Resource.

The Paddysat and other information confirms that step-out (Inferred) and infill (indicated) are taking place simultaneously as NCM are able to utilise 6 drills 24/7. The reason I think that the 6-9 months approx date has been extended out to year end 2020 is simply because the boundaries of Hav have not yet been established and therefore the expected time of being able to complete infill to release the MRE has had to be extended with drills still engaged in step-outs.

In other words fantastic news means we must be ever more patient.

My take on the subject anyway Greenmile.

Cheers. UR

Not sure why so many buys are showing as sells. I know how it can happen but this seems a bit odd here.

Flipping ‘eck Trucky,

You have done it now... he will be back like a shot!

Just when I was loving life.

Cheers pal . UR

HI Paddy,

Fantastic piece of work mate. Just sat here making sense of it all.

Thank you.

UR

Now then Nice,

I must admit to being fully with you and actually did the self-same thing today. Unfortunately it was shown as a sell but no doubt you can work out which it was from the price.

Roll on the next bit of news.

UR

Oh Callum is an interviewer now Red.

Poor Aaaaaaaandrew Scott!!

Excellent; simply excellent.

UR

15 mins gents and then news could arrive anytime.

UR