Anglesey Mining Share Discussion Threads

[buttyboy] 15/3/2024 09:16

I am not supporting AYM's methodology here but it is incorrect to compare drilling rates like this, trader 465; lot's of obstacles can affect the drilling rate (rock type, mobilisation and demobilisation, access issues, etc). I do agree though that AYM's "management" should extract their heads from their nether regions and have a more multi tasking approach so they can achieve more in less time. It is true to state that Parys Mt. has been the focus of AYM for literally decades and when you look back over that time and see what has been achieved it is pitiful. Only new qualified and proactive leadership will guide AYM positively forward and until this is put in place then unfortunately this is on a road to nowhere.

[trader465] 14/3/2024 09:36

20 OCT 2021: “Drilling to commence at Parys Mountain in early November
A nine-hole programme for 2,750m of diamond core drilling”

3 August 2023
“Northern Copper Zone ("NCZ") drilling is expected to start shortly, with the drill rig scheduled to be mobilised in the week commencing 11 September 2023. The six-hole programme, for approximately 3,725m”
_______________________________________

It will have taken around 3 years (900 days) and £3m of shareholders cash to drill just 15 holes (total 6,485m) in Parys mountain. That’s 7.2m per day progress. I wouldn’t call that “excellent progress”.

Compare the AYM drilling progress rate to a recent drill at SRB……
“The 2023 drilling programme in the Matilda district commenced in April and was completed in November with a total of 7,597.21 meters drilled from 21 holes”

SRB drilling 7,597m in 243 days, that’s a progress rate of 31.2m per day, or 430% faster/more productive than AYM.

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 22:00

RED ARMY; you are absolutely correct. I note the interim chairman signed off todays RNS and he is down as the sole point of contact apart from the lethargic crowd at WHIreland and to some extent, Davy. this needs some serious input.

[red army] 13/3/2024 20:54

The board are going to have to do something better than this to convince the market that they have a viable investment.

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 20:02

I read recently something about QME but cannot remember the exact detail; I do recall they had FROR on certain things (will have to re-check). I also noticed and recalled an outstanding loan/debt to JUNO to the tune of £3+M but I gather this has been on the cards for quite a number of years. Juno, as I recall, have the option to convert the debt, or some of it, to equity as and when so this might be an option. With a market cap as of today at some £5.5M then this debt represents approx 55% or the market cap of AYM. Food for thought!

[noccer] 13/3/2024 18:36

I would like to hear something from QME, they have invested considerable time to get their role of technical partners and to get their 30% earn-in option. They are experienced miners. Maybe there is a secrecy agreement in place.

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 17:08

Just noticed the share price has closed at 1.35p (same as yesterday); it hit an almighty high of 1.5p earlier today and this is on the back of today's news. The next drilling news, from Hole #3, is probably going to be out sometime in 4-6 weeks time given the sample preparation, freight and assay turn around times. Fingers crossed, before then there will be a positive update on new management. The market does not like uncertainty and right now there is a lot of that!!

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 14:32

wassapper .... "preliminary results" from the met testwork. Mention is also made of options and routes in this regard; some will have better recoveries for certain minerals at the expense of others etc. All I was aiming to state was not to use recoveries in your metal equivalent grades unless you have a very firm handle on them and to do so at this stage of the game could be detrimental to the RNS interpretation.

[wassapper] 13/3/2024 13:46

Butty - they completed met test work in Dec 23:

“We are very pleased by the preliminary results from the metallurgical testwork on the White Rock and Engine Zones, which have demonstrated that the assumptions used in the 2021 PEA are potentially on the conservative side. The results show that the overall metal recoveries appear to be better than expected, particularly for both copper and gold. It is also very positive to confirm that the Parys Mountain deposit is amenable to both DMS and XRT pre-concentration methods with the potential feed grade increased by over 50%.”

“Successful pre-concentration has many benefits ranging from increased feed grade into the processing plant, lower volumes of tailings for disposal and the potential to build smaller, lower cost processing infrastructure. We will now look to investigate the relevant capital and operating costs for each option to determine which is the most optimal route to move forward with in the planned Pre-Feasibility Study.”

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 13:12

Noccer; it is not always as simple of following the higher grade zones because to get to these, significant underground development will be required and the cost of this (waste removal) is on par with actual mining of economic mineralisation (stoping) .... all part of a mine plan which I'm sure will, or certainly should be, renewed once there is at least a prefeasibility study. The "old timers" would have mined certain higher grade portions because (1) the processing technology was not then available to extract sufficient economic minerals efficiently, and (2) labor costs were arguably not as important then as they are today.

Regarding the CuEq grades; equivalent grades, where recoveries are part of the equation, should not be used unless there is definitive knowledge of actual recoveries; here there is not; the recoveries quoted thus far, are semi-qualitative and semi-quantitative at best based on insufficient metallurgical work. By all means use Eq grades but don't use recoveries; just used metal prices.

Regarding your comment on 3D plotting; whatever software AYM uses, they can certainly plot these new holes into a wireframe model and indeed this is what will be required for an updated resource number. Bear in mind Hole 3 will certainly be well underway and perhaps even Hole 4 so it is unlikely the immediately planned holes will differ much from position. I see this hole has been plotted and a slice of this is shown in todays RNS together with historic holes, hence the notion of "infill drilling". The big question is; do they have the professional ability to keep doing this given the Board are in disarray, nostalgic brokers who are unlikely to raise new funds at reasonable price and discounts coupled with not ideal market conditions??

[noccer] 13/3/2024 09:55

Think they would target the high-grade intersects (like 515m to 525m) rather than the bulk stockwork. That's the way the miners operated here in the past. They followed the high grade veins and they would sometimes open out to 20m or more. The deposits are supposedly the result of deep sea 'smokers', so I guess it makes sense that you get localised high concentrations.

I found it a bit confusing that the table takes into account the recovery rates in the CuEq calculation, but not in the individual assays. So at 522 to 523 metres you have 6.57% copper, but only 6.37% CuEq.

I wonder if they are able to plug this information straight into the 3D model, and are planning the next hole on the basis of what that shows?

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 07:57

Secondly, when you analyse the assay result table, the individual intercepts with their respective base metal grades are not that great given the width, and bearing in mind this is planned to be an underground operation, as opposed to open-pit, then you either need to have a significant increase in combined grades and/or a significant increase in the metal prices. Bear in mind though, as metal prices increase, so does the cost of living and the operational costs (capex) will do likewise.

[buttyboy] 13/3/2024 07:42

"Expected Results", calmtrader! If the stock rises marginally, as it might today/tomorrow, I would sell a block and buy it back in a few days when the novelty factor has gone.

[calmtrader] 13/3/2024 07:09

Excellent results

[benjamin15] 08/3/2024 10:08

Seems that way, then more dilution probably.

[j5thumbs] 08/3/2024 09:52

The P&D rumour mill ?

[benjamin15] 08/3/2024 09:45

Traded just short of 1.1p a month before in December, what's your point?

[the_debt_collector] 08/3/2024 09:06

Buys piling in since late PM yesterday, leaky leaky !

Traded at 2.15p in January.

[benjamin15] 08/3/2024 08:43

Not even half a mil has been bought, nothing to see here as per usual

[pigeons] 08/3/2024 08:37

cannot buy any very strange

[calmtrader] 08/3/2024 08:26

Looks like the buying continues today

[buttyboy] 07/3/2024 19:19

All depends on the deal structure reference Grangesberg. Regarding the pre-close price hike, seems to me like some "inside" news might have leaked out; whether factual or otherwise remains to be seen. Lets see what happens tomorrow.!

[calmtrader] 07/3/2024 18:42

That would make a lot of sense