Member Info for Valency

Agree Daison, lifting of the suspension puts Lace back in production albeit half projected rate until December. The suspension caused the distress due to question marks on how long? That aspect just changed and reverted back to production in less than a week so the negotiation dynamics just changed and the would be funder that pulled out may be seriously regretting that decision as of today! Zero UK interest rates in EU, UK, & US etc. forces capital into emerging markets for growth as there is little to be gained elsewhere! The BoD's are now in a much stronger position than last week as a producer rather than a dormant suspended asset.

Both rampers/de-rampers would do themselves a great favour by simply reading the tech report/resource statement as it speaks for itself.....

Absolutely disagree Banksman! No plot whatsoever & having been here you'd understand small lots don't achieve competitive bidding tension at tender as they only attract a few dealers. Fact is after the idiotic section 54 was lifted (heads will roll) that UK4 core targeted zone is now back to extracting low dilution high grade ore and as I've stated previously, 14K-15Ktons/month subject to grade & dilution would net 8-11K carats over remaining 2 months to December to stabilize the draw area. Stones in held in reserve will be sold along with current production to strengthen size of the next tender. Similarly, 10K carat sale at conservative base case ($164.ct) would net $1.64M over next 2 months as e.g. Conspiracy theories are exactly that.....

Those of us having been here for many moons through thick & thin are familiar with trader ramps/de-ramps. They too come and go but the asset value continues & it's about how that value is determined.

This asset has constantly been undervalued as has PL's dedication, conviction & resourcefulness that brought Lace to market at the height of the global financial crisis. Much of that money is still invested here & it won't go at a loss to those Investors & II's that have stood steadfast through very trying times. PL = Loeb Aaron where they came across the Lace asset initially. Contacts galore.... I smell a mutually beneficial merger? A great asset to boost both parties & just shy of a small cash deficit on current production after idiotic suspension is lifted now. Suitor need not be cash rich & only requires small cash reserves required to continue both own existing project & Lace simultaneously and huge mutual gain for shareholders in both.

nholland12, inflationary question may require a complex answer as Daison stated. A fact that is much less complex is the effect that Brexit has on the Lace asset in GBP terms. Local production in ZAR with diamond industry sales & revenue (valuation) in US $. Simple answer; See how much more Bang (GBP) you get for the buck ($). Mine valuation is calculate in $ converted to GBP....

Daison, the DMR decision boggles the mind but it's 1 week? An appeal to change the section 54 order to a section 55 may follow today. The "trough" is located in the targeted low dilution high grade zone and at 14-15Ktons (half production) has the potential to produce 8-11K carats every 2 months subject to dilution & grade. Half production is anticipated to continue through end Dec until the draw area is safe. That is more than was produced during a 6 month period of development tunnelling. Tailings will also supplement during the 1 week underground stoppage and will further support the forecast rate thereafter as previously.

Still is a great asset, pity Aim investors didn't hold and support giving the stage of transition....

GFD, appreciate and respect your decision as well as sincerity which clearly lacks when reading some posts! I wish you well, and will no doubt chat again. ATB

When it rains, it pours! Old miners ghosts not giving up the bounty easily. The DMR have been overly harsh and criticized widely in the industry for not evaluating incidents by merit. Attempting an appeal against a 1 week suspension decision is fruitless really so just have to take it is. Perhaps this small unsubstantial issue actually shows how cautious & safety conscious management have really been under much more trying conditions. Needless to say, this will invoke another kneejerk reaction...

Anyone wonder if one of Mr Wiese's shadow investment entities broke out a rod & reel today? Might be wise to keep an eye open for any of these names if any holdings declarations are received in coming days/weeks. - Calibre, Cream Magenta 140 Pty Ltd, Metcap 14 Pty Ltd & RAC Investment Holdings PTY Ltd. Here is the appointed independent valuation opinion for TransHex by Snowden MIC Pty Ltd. The offer was snubbed by the BoD's advising shareholders against the offer. http://www.transhex.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Posting-of-the-Combined-Offer-Circular.pdf ATB

Half rate is projected and partial production affirms continued revenue generation although short of cash requirements. Quality is confirmed and safety record remains high. A core part of the announcement -"In order to avoid injury to the workforce and/or damage to the drill rig, the drilling of trough fans - which when blasted provide the mineable tonnage - will have to be drilled from a position of safety in the production tunnels on the 310m level rather than the central trough tunnel until the end of December when the troughs are safely clear of the old development workings". - The confirmation I sought & view as critical was progressing beyond development work to the "trough" as it is located in and forms part of the high grade targeted zone! It confirms that development work on the UK 4-block mine plan is essentially complete thus upper workings are no longer disturbed by drilling/blasting from open unprotected tunnels and it also leads to positive controlled draw of water/mud locked up in "old upper" workings while high grade ore is extracted albeit a reduced rate until December. Of course there are still very real risks as the bulls b@lls are dislodged but the place & design point from which to do this, is the trough which is now in effect. Institutional/large shareholders will have the benefit of a comprehensive brief ahead of us mushrooms & we have to make the best of limited info that we can! It's not easy on long term holders but one just needs to decide if the issues are terminal & sometimes better to sit on your hands than be swept into a negative hasty overreaction given the update in full context. Much value traded hands this morning with the emphasis on present value. Fear & frustration in exchange for patience and value? Only time will tell......

Won't disagree with that....

Otherwys, you're most welcome!

Hi Otherwys, apology for not being able to access my files earlier but here is the study relating to the benefits of utilising slimes water with the grease belt process compiled for Anglo/DeBeers by MINTEK, J. Danoczi. Diamond Recovery Figure 7: Contaminated grease from the filtered dam water. The results in Table 1 indicate that the water from the slimes dam is more suitable for the recovery of diamonds in the grease plant than the water from the local river. The results also show that the slimes dam water, left untreated, had the highest diamond recovery with the least amount of movement of the diamonds when the jig is agitated. These results indicate the diamond-water contact angle for the water from the slimes dam is the smallest and that this water source is repelled the most by the diamond surface. The results from Table 2 show that the water surface tension from the slimes dam was in fact the strongest of the three water sources. The pH of the water also affects the surface tension of the water and was also found to be the highest for the three water sources. Soaps and settling agents destroy the surface tension of water and it is expected that some form of settling agent was used in the filtered water in order to obtain such a clean water source. Conclusion Using water from the slimes dam is beneficial to the recovery of diamonds on grease. Making use of water from a slimes dam or even using the mine's processed water significantly reduces the impact of the mining operation on the water supply of the area. In the past it was thought that the requirement for the recovery of diamonds on grease was with fresh clean water. The mine has subsequently changed this philosophy and changed the water in the grease plant to water from the slimes dam. http://www.saimm.co.za/Conferences/DiamondsSourceToUse2007/009-Danoczi.pdf I forwarded & discussed the study back in Dec 2015 with AL, SW and it was confirmed that the method had been adopted at Lace. ATB

Otherwys, no apology required and not a naïve question at all - "Is it possible to capture the water that's causing us a problem to help alleviate future water constraints? In which case, is it possible that water ingress could in some small way have a silver lining?" - Yes it is possible and will be used although not required in essence for the UK 4 mine plan at 30ktons/month. Water/mud drawn off from upper old workings will be pumped to the slimes dam to first settle the mud fraction and the slimes water is actually beneficial in the "grease belt" recovery process as I mentioned earlier. I will post the study results once I locate it in my files? Note - Normal underground inflow from storm water runoff and adjacent natural ground water aquifer's is estimated at 22cubic m/Hr established over a 5 year period maintaining a steady groundwater level. This groundwater is pumped to the newly completed dams/reservoirs for use in the processing plant. Initially, processing plant water requirements were 1cu m/ton which reduced by 50% since installation of the de-grit & the adoption of larger 1.25mm screen sizes by removal of a large fraction of "fine sand". Thus 0.5cu m/ton is currently required and @30Ktons/month production i.e. 1Ktons/day = +-20.5cu m/Hr is required for UK 4 mine operations making it sufficient. NB. A further 85% of processing pant water is recycled/recoverable! There is thus additional excess water capacity at this stage but not sufficient for plant utilisation at max capacity 1.2M tons/year during later deeper block caving, hence the proposed future planned X-ray waste sorter 2018? Hope this helps?

Otherwys, I will reply later but have to run out for a while...

G'morning Yield Strength. Great line of though & questions! You will find detailed info in the "Tech Report" Chapter 16.2 pg16-10 to the end of Chapter 16. Your 1st Q - "On the topic of the hydrogeology issue, are you able to speculate on the extent of the problem i.e. the size of the water compartment which DCP might be dealing with?" A - No, I can't speculate. The issue of water/mud in old mine workings is well documented in the above Chapter 16. The open pit was pumped dry a few years ago and as stated in the Risk Assessment 16.3 - Water/mud would've migrated from the pit bottom down into old workings which requires and is planned to be to be drawn off prior to bulk block caving. If engineers have detailed "old mine plans" they can form an estimate of the extent? Chapter 19.9 Details the de-watering process and as long as existing water is sealed & contained in upper workings until controlled draw can be exercised through the Long Hole Open Stope, the risks can be controlled & mitigated as per the UK4 mine plan. It is during the development phase while blasting/drilling into old workings that risks are highest and not surprising that water broke through while connecting the old shaft through a 2.1m raised bore up to the 250m (old working level) to complete the RAP from 310m & 290m levels. PL advised that the ingress was sealed and the issues essentially resolved. My view on the issue is that once ore is drawn through the "West Trough" the risks are largely controllable as there is no development disturbance to upper workings and the trough is kept partially full of broken ore at all times with the air gap trapping water/mud for controlled draw. Please see "Draw Control Strategy" 16.3.3.4 through "Mandatory Code of Practice 16.3.3.5 The revised tonnage (20K tons) for September forms part of the "Draw Control Committee" decisions to progress at a slightly lower draw rate during the initial production stage. It is a wise decision until the rate of ingress can be assessed through controlled draw! Of course reduced draw (lower production) places strain on capital & though it pee's off investor's, it is simply not negotiable to risk lives & the mine's future for bulk tonnage & quick revenue! I am not debating sufficient previous provisioning, merely the mine safety and securing future production & revenue in the very short term. Hope it helps & ATB

Einvestein, JSE is very illiquid & not really the best indicator as I'm sure you are aware. Interesting but I tried to test the waters with a dummy sell & MM's were happy to take 200K off my hands @ 3.85P so perhaps you have a point as regards a "kill/fill" order? It's been a tough few weeks for everyone & I'm still struggling to acclimatise so I'm going to attempt to unwind over the weekend. Wish you all an enjoyable one under the circumstances & suggest those still remaining in DCP should pour a stiff 1 or 2 to steady the nerves!! ATB

Jaf, we're all feeling the pain & I don't disagree with you at all. As I said previously, cant change corporate culture! Share price movements such as this generally gets a Board to react to steady investors nerves? PI's are always 'mushrooms' (kept in the dark & fed on cr@p) but there are no prizes for throwing in the towel at this critical stage of transition based on contagious nerves which seems to have established itself. Einvestein, thanks for the effort and link posted. Seems I was typing at the same time you posted. Yes, though I have little time for EW, I do communicate with PL occasionally but I try to keep it to a minimum to avoid irritating him & considering that many have done so the past few days, I'm not so sure it would be helpful at this time as his inbox is likely inundated and it would likely just end up in the unanswered stack? Lace resource won't remain in the ground & fortunately diamonds don't spoil in the soil. Either DCP will successfully transition & bring them to the surface soon or the value/potential will be seen by someone else, if not already? I'm sticking to the fundamentals & valuation perhaps to my own detriment but time will be the decider here. As 'oldpro' say's, uncertainty is when others strike and I'm not going to play into anyone's hands in the absence of news! ATB