[ADVERT]
Share Name Share Symbol Market Type Share ISIN Share Description
Castillo Copper Limited LSE:CCZ London Ordinary Share AU000000CCZ2 ORD NPV (DI)
  Price Change % Change Share Price Bid Price Offer Price High Price Low Price Open Price Shares Traded Last Trade
  -0.05 -3.45% 1.40 1.30 1.40 1.45 1.35 1.45 1,613,918 16:35:21
Industry Sector Turnover (m) Profit (m) EPS - Basic PE Ratio Market Cap (m)
- - - - 0

Castillo Copper Share Discussion Threads

Showing 801 to 821 of 875 messages
Chat Pages: 35  34  33  32  31  30  29  28  27  26  25  24  Older
DateSubjectAuthorDiscuss
20/8/2021
09:43
perhaps they should to talk to the taliban about the possibilities of copper mining in afghanistan! then, we may get some action!
abbynat
19/8/2021
07:21
Incidentally disappointing that Castillo have not responded to my concerns, which in my book does not bode well. Nothing in the communication was insider or could constitute seeking that.
pensionplanner
19/8/2021
07:18
Looking like another one of my 'great' investment decisions again. Can't believe I let myself get suckered in with that July rns.
fo77y
10/8/2021
11:18
Ged Hall, Director, Castillo Copper, 10 hrs ago, Tues, 10 Aug 2021 in an audio interview: --"ARYA WHAT COULD BE ONE OF QUEENSLAND LARGEST COPPER DISCOVERIES IN DECADES."--- Link: https://twitter.com/TheMarketBullAU/status/1424887940321222675 Also: "Big One MRE - Assays Pending. Arya large magnetic..BHP Exciting period." == CCZ RNS, TUES, 10 AUG 2021 Geophysicist Consultant: SHALLOWER 100-200m VS 430m BHP verification that Arya prospect is a MAJOR target in the Mt Isa copper belt of Queensland, Australia. Surface result 1.84% cu even more compelling. QUIET AREA near Arya. [2 NEW bits of info ie SHALLOWER & QUIET AREA] [Ged Hall's statement re: Arya above [para before the link] is also in the SI Capital Jan 2021 Broker Note which I posted recently on this forum. The MRE for the Big One, Queensland, Australia is also mentioned in the said broker note. Always CHECK as there can be typo errors. DYOR. J London, Tues, 10 Aug 2021. Most definitive diagram tweeted by Castillo Copper today [x3] of Arya EG01, EG02 & EG10 https://twitter.com/CastilloCopper/status/1424985122743463942 7 hrs ago, Tues, 10 Aug 2021.
jlondon
10/8/2021
09:22
Would be good to follow the aussies 8% up, seeing as though we always follow them down. Should be an interesting September ahead then.
fo77y
10/8/2021
08:04
Would have thought they would have commented on any visibly mineralised intersections in the more recent drills.
thelung
08/8/2021
17:36
On the London South East CCZ forum today, Sun, 8 Aug 2021, a few investors have posted. The SI Capital Jan 2021 Broker Note has been posted with the pertinent points prior to this latest conversation. 1 speculated that after this current drill ends, then results + coming Arya, there may be a further drilling campaign. It may or it may NOT be but this shows that common to an MRE, it needs X amount of holes. This shows that given what I said, it would have been IMPOSSIBLE for any poster to have given a DEFINITIVE VIEW on the OUTCOME OF THE RESOURCE SIZE ETC without the drill/s & results. How can anyone have a definitive when there is NOT ENOUGH DATA YET? The latest release was for a few holes out of so many to come?
jlondon
08/8/2021
14:43
HttPs://www.knowledgeleaderscapital.com/2021/08/06/the-american-push-into-evs-could-set-the-stage-for-full-cycle-outperformance-of-copper-producers/
pensionplanner
07/8/2021
13:29
CASTILLO COPPER - SI CAPITAL BROKER NOTE, JAN 2021[latest available]: "Pg2: ..Identify EXTENSIONS, PARARELL LODES at the Big One deposit with the current drill holes & historic data, the team have COMMISSIONED a MAIDEN RESOURCE ESTIMATE to be developed. This will focus on a shallow, open pit-able oxide orebody, with an enriched SUPERGENE-chalcocite blanket [transition zone] & HYPOGENE mineralisation continuing to DEPTH." "Factoring in 20 completed RC holes during the 2020 RC campaign, coupled with the 27 historic holes drill from 1993, a growing exploration model is starting to develop." "INVESTMENT SYNOPSIS: The HIGH GRADE intercepts announced from the Big One are very encouraging pointing to the possibility of simple, NEAR SURFACE ore extraction & with the CONSISTENT HIGH GRADES [see table provided] the OPTIONALITY for the team to secure NEAR TERM CASH FLOW through ...processed ORE SALES to MILLS IN THE REGION." "The width & grades along with the possible STRIKE & extensions also indicate the Big One could be a SIZEABLE SYSTEM & along with TARGETS including ARYA should make Castillo a PRIME TARGET OF M A J O R OPERATORS LOOKING TO SECURE FUTURE PRODUCTION." "RISKS:..counterbalance..Mt Oxide portfolio HOLDS A NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL TARGETS, WITHIN TRUCKABLE distance that could quickly be DEVELOPED & added to the operation. -ARYA TARGET is an extensive EM target, which, if expected is a HIGH GRADE MASSIVE sulphide ore-body could be ONE OF THE LARGEST DISCOVERIES IN THE REGION IN RECENT YRS. Constrained by early exploration indicators, which makes this high risk target. Initial drilling may PROVE to refine the current GEOPHYSICS ANOMALY MODEL but signify DE-RISKING LATER, 2ND STAGES OF THE DRILLING CAMPAIGN." Link: hxxps://castillocopper.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/CCZ-SI-Capital-11.01.21.pdf My Comment: The above gives a good timeline for Castillo Copper : Big One project, Qld, Oz. Coming Arya prospect scouting drill, Maiden Resource etc. As said, ALL prospects are high risk UNTIL scout drilled as it then moves into proven and DE-RISKING 2nd stage further drilling which is norm? Arya is of particular interest + other targets. Helpful as an overview of what the co is hoping to achieve, what has been drilled and where they hope to go etc? DYOR. Sat 7 Aug 2021. Kindly check as there could be copying errors.
jlondon
07/8/2021
12:05
PensionPlanner I was listening to Owen Hegarty^s CNBC International interview again yesterday and he makes the same point about copper and also that there are not many copper plays around in Australia. Perhaps he does not just mean green field given he is talking about his IPO. So, per the forecasts when supply tightens further, then copper price has to rise for majors etc to close that gap per Glencore*s CEO. Hence, its a matter of timing etc? Case-in-point: The lithium story, hiccups & currently the chase. I therefore agree that the commercial reality vs vision is something to note? ---SP ANGEL - No 1 in Copper & Gold etc--- Ref: "Today^s Market View- Versarien, Rainbow Rare Earths and Maersk & more."-Proactive Investors, UK, Fri, 6 Aug 2021 "Castillo Copper: Conclusion: In Jan this yr, Castillo Copper confirmed that the potential to divest the BHA project was under active consideration in order to allow it to focus on advancing its copper strategy. Today^s announcement confirms that as the preferred choice." As I posted earlier, at the end of every CCZ RNS, it is stated that SI Capital is the Broker & Nominated Advisor. So, I spotted share price Angel covering CCZ for the last RNS relating to the results from the Big One. They posted parts of the release but made no comment. In this CCZ RNS of 6 Aug 2021, share price Angel, per the normal style put in their Conclusion. They dont often do Conclusion but I have seen them do it at times for Solgold. Its good that CCZ has more coverage which can only be positive? Sat, 7 Aug 2021.
jlondon
07/8/2021
00:33
In relation to the CCZ release of 26/7/21... Why were holes 201, 202 and 203 not plotted in Figure 3? If, as stated by CCZ and shown by assays, holes 201, 202 and 203 missed the mineralisation then why would they drill 315 wholly into the zone defined by the three misses? Why do the data for holes 315 and 316 in Fig A1 of the release not agree with what is shown in Figure 3? Could it be that holes 315 and 316 are wrongly plotted in Figure 3?
ozbucheron
06/8/2021
22:21
29M IPO The recent 29M IPO at A$1bn consists of the Capricorn mine, Qld, Golden Grove in WA, Oz & another in Chile. So, the Capricorn mine itself may not be valued at A$1bn. The information should be in the listing schedule. However, AFR reported that the "IPO portfolio recorded $621 million revenue & $185m in EBITDA in the 2021 financial yr." Hegarty formerly ran RIO TINTO*s Australian copper/gold business and was founder of Oxiana Gold Ltd [now Oz]. Source: AFR == "Cashed up Owen Hegarty returns as deal maker."-AFR, 31 Jan 2015 "FORTESQUE Vice Chairman & mining identity has re-emerged at the helm of a US$450m war chest.. Most of the capital has come from large institutional investors in the US, mainly endowments by universities and corporations, foundations, family offices & fund of funds. European institutions are also invested. Volatility is driving all the mining co*s mad. You cant raise equity at the right time & sometimes you cant raise debt, he said. [Chang of EMR Capital] The current mkt presents OPPORTUNITY. Quite often, the GOOD ASSETS SIT IN THE HANDS OF CO*S THAT CANT RAISE C A P I T A L. Mr Hegarty was MD of Rio Tinto Asia." == I remember that period. So, there*s the answer why copper assets were being sold.
jlondon
06/8/2021
18:26
It illustrates my concern though as Hegarty paid just $45m in 2015 for an asset now valued at over a $1,000,000,000 admittedly with another asset as well as he paid $210,000,000 for Golden Grove...but not a bad return. I bet those who divested are pig sick
pensionplanner
06/8/2021
16:34
Castillo Copper tweeted today at 3pm+, Fri, 6 Aug 2021 Link: https://twitter.com/CastilloCopper It relates to Mt Oxide and the "context." CCZ's tweet also mentioned that Big One,Qld is near "historic and OPERATING MINES" namely, Mt Oxide, LADY ANNIE & CAPRICORN MINE. CCZ shows the map and their prospects. I have already posted a few days ago that Lady Annie was sold to the Chinese and Capricorn Mine was bought by the renowned Owen Hegarty and has just IPO'ed in Australia with a mkt cap of A$1bn. CNBC International interviewed Owen Hegarty as its not everyday that a mining co comes to mkt at A$1bn. The co is named 29M. 3 prospects are in 29M ie Capricorn Mine, one in WA, Oz & Chile. Its just occured to me that given the 3 historic and operating mines are close or closer to CCZ's Big One, the geology will be in that same category but grades may differ somewhat in part/s. However, to me, I am looking forward to the Competent Person [Geo] preparing the JORC as indicated in the Feb 2021 CCZ Presentation. CCZ tweeted a few days ago to ask shareholders and potential investors to look at this Feb 2021 presentation. They later tweeted the next day, a para from the said presentation ie major discovery which I have posted already. Fri, 6 Aug 2021.
jlondon
06/8/2021
10:01
PensionPlanner Over the years, I have experienced on forums, postings that I have never had to experience in real life. However, from school, I was taught never to go down to that level. Any reasonable person gives a logical explanation of any co. To do so, one has to go into development synopsis or a fuller explanation. So, this morning, I have read your elucidation which is clear. I am also cognisant of the processes and the steps thereof. So, in this regard, I am cognisant that you are aware of the processes as well. That is your right to contact your LAWYERS as that is due process and it is also right you make no further comment as norm. On any stock forum, one can post lots of views but whether those views eventuate is another thing. So, one or two, dont like development synopsis styles but rather just x, y, z. However, research, I find is helpful to be able to get an idea of what a project may eventuate but it is never a GUARANTEE until the drill hits at least 1 hole. David Lovell, hall of fame geologist who discovered Escondida said he could tell with 1 hole but this is not the norm. I read it on his website RIP. These days, I tend not to take such an all out risk unless the geopyhsics etc is compelling and even then a more modest stake instead of just plunging in. Ad hominen is sometimes used as this detracts from the subject matter. This is what I have experienced at times. So, perhaps, I recognise in your posts that you have made points which has room for further discussion and quite rightly, it is your right to take things forward per the processes. Thank you. JL, Fri, 6 Aug 2021.
jlondon
06/8/2021
09:27
Must mention how pleasing it is to correspond with someone without personal jibes. Congratulations on conducting yourself thus JL. As I've commented there is nothing more to post on this bb about that particular subject.
pensionplanner
06/8/2021
08:45
PensionPlanner Although you did not address your last post post to me of #777, Fri, 6 Aug 2021, it was interesting nevertheless to read that you stated: "I have made myself clear & hope the BOD reconsider as I'doubtful this deal complies with the rules, but I have used my best endeavours to ensure the authorities INVESTIGATE this transaction, and MY OWN LAWYERS ENGAGED on the subject so I do not believe I should comment further." Yes, that is the rule of law in a democracy. I believe in the processes: 1] Consensus of shareholders if one wants to engage others to put forward an email or letter to the board with stated reasons etc. 2] If a significant holder of CCZ shares has 5% of the shares [voting rights], they can call for an EGM. 3]Ask that the transaction is within the regulations. Usually, generally, the IPO will set out fair value as norm and this is just my understanding for ALL transactions. 4]The last process will be to instruct lawyers to write to the board relating to the transaction and set out the points etc. So, one awaits further development which will be made known to the market if there is further development. Fri, 6 Aug 2021.
jlondon
06/8/2021
07:59
PensionPlanner Relating to your post above #775, 6 Aug 2021 [Fri], I went to have a look. I found the original CCZ RNS dated "Highlights: Acquisition gives Castillo a commanding position in Broken Hill - A TRANSFORMATIONAL MOVE which delivers a large footprint proximal to Broken Hill*s world class silve-zinc-lead deposit." Dated 1 Oct 2020 "Castillo*s enlarged package...geological modelling released by GSNSW highlighted the ground is PROSPECTIVE for Broken Hill type ZINC-SILVER-LEAD and IRON OXIDE-COPPER-GOLD mineralisation [IOCG]." CCZ paid A$215,000 cash plus assign 2% NSR in the event of future mining operations materialising. My Comment: The CONTEXT of transformational is qualifed as in the said RNS from CCZ by the worl "move." In a lot of the CCZ RNS, it does state: "prospective." There appears to be 2 types of geology - the west side is Broken Hill type and East is more IOCG. So, they paid upfront A$215,000 for it and did further technical work on it as said in the RNS above. I did say that it is my view ONLY that any prospective target could be "TRANSFORMATIONAL" as NORM. I did not recall the latest CCZ RNS stating that Broken Hill is transformation so I decided to have a look. So, the context was qualified by the board as in the original RNS of 1 Oct 2020. Kindly check. Currently, at 9:32am, Fri, 6 Aug 2021 the share price is 1.9p to sell and 2.1p to buy [Advertised, not live]. Live price [dummy] is 2.0298p to Buy [normal mkt size only] and to sell 1.9301p. This will help as its hard to distinguish buying and selling price since the spread is not very wide. There is no change either + or -.
jlondon
06/8/2021
07:33
JL. Thank you for your polite reply. The idea that one of the more experienced investors has voiced they fear dilution, makes no sense really under the circumstances? If the company has not got the wherewithall to raise £2.4m using the consultants and skills it also requires for an IPO then it is more a reflection on them. The logic that one investor fears dilution makes no sense because the alternative is to have no beneficial interest in this 'transformational' asset at all, unless they cop up with paying for shares in the new company, for an asset they already held. The company gets diluted if an asset is given away too, and the potential is much more than the £2.4m or so the company expects to get from an IPO, so the downside is much greater having an IPO than even dilution, but where even with dilution CCZ shareholders would still own the asset in question and the potential of that asset. Failing that the directors could offer existing shareholders to raise the £2.4m in an open offer to shareholders, and even then although non subscribing shareholders who may not have the money to subscribe, would still enjoy the potential of the asset and others choosing to subscribe would also, within the umbrella of CCZ avoiding all the costs of an IPO, which in my opinion should not have been green lighted and already arranging parties to progress the IPO, without a proper discussion and vote by shareholders as its a fundamental change to the business, one that could be very poor for existing shareholders.I know they discussed the potential for an IPO previously, but not the terms, which I find inexplicable and unacceptable let alone possibly in breach of AIM, LSE and Companies Act requirements. I've been investing for 45 years, so I don't get impressed with comments about one of the more experienced investors and no disrespect intended. "So, unless one can be sure at this early point with NO DRILLING done at Broken Hill that its going to turn out X, Y or Z, that is "potential" as is norm. Of course, it COULD be "transformational" - any prospect can be but UNTIL DRILLED there is no guarantee no matter how promising at this stage. I am sure that when the IPO comes out, the listing documents will show CAVEATS as usual at the end as norm." If this were the case then one would have to question the judgement of our Board in their description of the asset, and acquiring it in the first place and the glowing RNS about Broken Hill.
pensionplanner
06/8/2021
07:21
PensionPlanner #773 Thank you for your further elucidation as its important to see it also from your point of view. Of course, you are right, as I have already stated, that IF Broken Hill turns out to be "transformational", it may be good to keep it EVEN IF IT MEANS DILUTION etc. On the London South East CCZ forum, one of the more experienced investors has voiced they fear dilution. So, perhaps, go over to the London South East to make your point & if enough people think so, one can approach the co. That is fair and democractic. I know this wont be popular. However, from my own perspective, if 1 person on Twitter has an interest in this co, one could ask him. He might have some idea given he is a mining engineer and qualified from Oz etc. However, I cant ask the favour so I have to do my own work and that will take a long time. I dont just jump but do due diligence, so I differ but by all means, take it forward. J.L 6 Aug 2021.
jlondon
06/8/2021
07:14
No its not straightforward, yes we have the cash, which may or may not assist developing remaining assets, but you look at the RNS announcements about Broken Hill....TRANSFORMATIONAL, so we lose what could be a multi million asset for £2.4m cash, where we've expended money on that already? Better to finance the £2.4m or come to CCZ shareholders for it keeping it CCZ, instead of what some may consider stealing an asset from CCZ and passing it via IPO to person/persons unknown and where we only know the chairman, but do not know if our current directors will be on the board there, which would in my opinion be against Companies Act as offering terms prejudicial to minority shareholders. Again this asset was 'transformational', so if we get £2.4m for it, and its spun off BECAUSE its a great asset, it could end up being a £100m asset for what...£2.4m of spending money for CCZ directors to use. Better then to finance it, even if it means dilution, we would still be in a better position that not having the asset at all. Failing that a shareholder only offer placing, as if raising £2.4m is that hard for our directors perhaps they should consider other employment. I have not only made my position clear, I have reported it to both the LSE and the FCA as I do not believe it complies with the rules, and may be in contravention of the Companies Act regarding minority shareholders, let alone disposal of a significant asset. I have seen similar elsewhere, and on one occasion an asset spun off, within months was worth multiples of the company that spun it off....which is OK if shareholders share in that success with what is OUR asset, but where it mentions SUBSCRIBING, its not on. In that case why not use shareholders to subscribe for £2.4M shares in CCZ, because at least ALL shareholders would stand to gain, whether they chose to buy more shares in a preferential offer to shareholders in the same company, rather than HAVE no interest in an asset they own spun off as another company, unless they effectively REPURCHASE their own asset! Some shareholders may not have the money to do that, and would be disenfranchised, and effectively it puts existing shareholders at a distinct disadvantage, and under duress to either buy shares in the new company or face losing the potential of this transformational asset, which CCZ was so glowing about. I get the impression that some posters are not private investors, but may be acting as spokespeople for CCZ
pensionplanner
Chat Pages: 35  34  33  32  31  30  29  28  27  26  25  24  Older
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
LSE
CCZ
Castillo C..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20220125 04:11:02