Asiamet Resources Share Discussion Threads

[dorset64] 17/4/2024 07:31

Im guessing you're perfect day out must be attending funerals yeah?

[dorset64] 17/4/2024 07:17

Just maybe they might be an international organisation that has in country presence and of whom both use the same Indo labs?Or they may be an in country organisation that uses the same labs, who knows but they are obviously deep in conversation and trust.

[dorset64] 17/4/2024 07:11

Take from the RNS what they are telling you, that during DD an organisation visited site and asked for samples taken from their visit, to be tested. From that came these results of above ground metals in two locations ie, they're not just interested in one area, BKM, but possibly the whole site and/or the company in either a jv or dull purchase of the company. Additionally, as there are others doing their own DD, this RNS is more for 'everyone to see' and ultimately, imo, for one of them to hurry up & push the button.Also look at what they are telling you in that their own redesign of the site has leaned towards smaller starter mines so that profits are earned early in the process with a ramp up over time of the whole area. In the background DD still ongoing at Beutong, so hopefully could be an exciting few quarters for shareholders.

[stockhunters] 17/4/2024 07:09

good rns here copper on the up again

[v11slr] 17/4/2024 07:05

Call me a cynical old Hector but why would a potential partner/buyer take samples and then ask ARS to assay them for them? Wouldn't they have their own trusted assay facilities if they were a serious player?

[mcpaulas] 17/4/2024 07:00

No news news again.

[napoleon 14th] 14/4/2024 11:36

Computer-driven site "WALL STREET" has come up with this gem of info about ARS, LOL!
Doesn't mention the main MAJOR RISK - Toni Manini...

"Asiamet Resources ARS
Share Price 7 Day 1 Year
0.01p 4.0% -39.5%

New minor risk - Financial data availability
The company's latest financial reports are more than 6 months old.
Last reported fiscal period ended June 2023.
This is considered a minor risk. If the company has not reported its earnings on time, it may have been delayed due to audit problems or it may be finding it difficult to reconcile its accounts.
Currently, the following risks have been identified for the company:

Major Risk
Revenue is less than US$1m.
Minor Risks
Latest financial reports are more than 6 months old (reported June 2023 fiscal period end).
Market cap is less than US$100m (UK£14.5m market cap, or US$18.0m).




Haha!

[adw198] 14/4/2024 06:33

If / when you reappear with another new profile I’ll be here to point out your ramping nonsense. Pretending to read a copper chart is brilliant stuff, Bradshaw. :)

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 14:12

Looking at the weekly Cu chart this "could be it" ie "the move we've all been waiting for". $4.70 looks decent like.

I'm going to take a break from owning the nerds and the morons on here and come back when the AIM GOAT Manini and our wonderful CEO "Bobby Dazzler" get proceedings underway for real.

Later losers.

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 10:47

Yeah we'll leave it there mate, as you're boring me now. It's not built yet. well done, you win the kids competition.

Now go back and join the groovy gang as you've got skateboarding this afternoon.

[adw198] 13/4/2024 10:32

Yep my contention is they couldn’t get the previous study financed. My evidence is the FACT it’s not built and wasn’t close to being. If you have a different take let’s hear it and if you don’t then it transpires you agree with me so we can leave it there.

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 10:27

Top stuff Captain Obvious. It's not built yet.

Either wait or bed in on Von Shirley's fun bus. Get some tunes on, maybe some stuff from Talking Heads, I recommend 'Road to nowhere ' top tune fella.

Not investment advice and entirely my personal and humble opinion! DYOR!

[adw198] 13/4/2024 10:14

Nobody fancied partnering with Asiamet to build it. It’s why it’s not built and there’s no sign of it being built.

I don’t know why you keep bringing up ARCM, but then I don’t know why you made a new profile. What I do know is you won’t answer.

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 10:09

Why don't you run along to Von Shirndings fun bus, kiddo, and wait several years if ever for some drill results. Purely my humble opinion, not investment advice and please DYOR!

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 10:05

If 'nobody fancied it' please explain how a mining services company with circa 16,000 employees now owns circa 36% of Asiamet?

Thanks for coming ladies and gentlemen. Another game, set and match here. Move along now.

[adw198] 13/4/2024 10:01

The “2022” study had a higher the theoretical IRR. The previous one was more economically viable and would make more money using the same copper price.

My point was nobody fancied a project with an IRR of 19% using $3.30lb copper - even when copper was $4.50lb. And it appears nobody fancies current one either. A year since its release what progress has been made on financing? And remember this is the “fast track” due to the delay in the FS

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 09:47

So out of the two studies, which one had the higher IRR? Was it the 2019 study or the 2023 study?

Check mate. Game, set and match fella.

[adw198] 13/4/2024 09:22

And I would 100% maintain that a project with a 19% IRR is much more profitable if it uses a 21% lower FORECAST price of copper. Imagine the IRR on the 2019 study at today’s copper price. Shame we couldn’t get anywhere getting it financed and built.

Anyway, tell us why you created a new profile?

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 09:16

In life I've learnt you really have to master the basics first. No point trying to do the hard stuff when you haven't mastered the easy stuff.

So let's strip away all the bright lights and dancing and get back to basics:

The 2019 study IRR was 19%. The 2023 study IRR was 21%. Now you can add all the fluff and razzmatazz you want around them numbers, but thems the facts bro!

Yeah but no but yeah but i don't care fella. Just tell me in your own words the IRR's from the two studies and then explain which is the larger number LoL

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 09:08

Mate you can twist and turn all you want, but you will never convince me that 19 is a higher number than 21.

[adw198] 13/4/2024 08:18

Morning Bradshaw
I correctly said the new FS would be less attractive than the old one. The IRR was calculated using a 21% higher FORECAST price of copper. A year since its release even an apologist like yourself had to recognise they haven’t even got passed first base with the un appointed bank. And there’s no timeframe for when they will. Still, great news about the power station.

How come you created a new profile btw?

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 04:30

Personally, adw198, I think you're wrong on your repeated comments along the lines of 'this wont get financed' and 'DOID will take it out on the cheap'

If I remember correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong, but you were completely incorrect about the updated FS, saying the IRR would be lower than the 2019 study, when in fact it came in circa 2% higher.

Taking all of this into consideration, along with my opinion that you know sod all about resource extraction, I would in the end suggest that you button it, fella! Lol!

[rainyrain] 13/4/2024 03:52

Awww so sweet that you copy your hero's with the old 'boiler room pump line'. Aren't they supposed to be in hot sweaty tropical places?

Caught out? By someone who did DD into Nick Von Shirnding then said "yep" this looks good?

LoL sit down kiddo and get in your lane you dupper.

[adw198] 12/4/2024 18:36

@rainy aka Bradshaw

“Maybe because DOID haven't worked on a copper mine before and don't want to take the risk of having a crack from the start?”


So we shouldn’t concern ourselves as to why they walked away from the deal, but you can speculate as to why if it suits. You’re not clever enough to even have an alias without being caught out, let alone run a boiler room pump.

Did they not realise they had no experience when signing a HOA and conducting a 9month due diligence process. Top work :)