Galantas Gold Share Discussion Threads

[fatso] 23/8/2013 11:28

There is no point in taking GAL private, having to pay back Phelps his loans to the Co. Much better to wait and acquire it, lock stock and a barrel, for peanuts as a bankrupt stock.

[selwynslacker] 23/8/2013 10:53

My residual stock now sold. Shame.

Good luck to those still holding.

[bamboo2] 18/8/2013 23:20

anyone think they might take it private?

[resourceful] 14/8/2013 08:26

i accept thast the ore grade is 3plus
but that is not viable for underground
also it matters not what the ore is if what you supply the mill is 2g/t
they must be losing their ass

[bahamasoil] 12/8/2013 16:47

Looks to me as if NI Government are sending mixed signals

[selwynslacker] 12/8/2013 12:30

It is simply not 1g/t - they have stopped mining and are currently processing low grade ore they have to hand.... the overall resource is a tad richer.

[resourceful] 12/8/2013 12:25

surely this is dead
mining 1g/t
no reason to assume they will get planning without objections
why did they not foresee the objectors
not sure they can make money @3g/t..even with permission

[nmf777] 11/8/2013 08:57

Don't know what's going on here but copied below is a post from i-i-i dated 5 weeks ago (hope you don't mind me posting it here JOHNNIEIS). I was wondering if cheading was still involved and evidently he is, in some capacity at least.


"Given the inordinate timescale taken over the planning process I resolved to contact the company, and have just finished a very positive conversation with Courtney Heading, who holds several million shares himself.

They have nearly finished dealing with all the planning issues from toads etc onwards and do expect to win planning permission within months. It just takes forever to do it properly.There is also positive news to come on other fronts too. We would hear more news but for the dual listing ( that's why it's in my ISA) in Toronto where rules on announcements are far tougher than AIM.

Apparently the company is held in high regard for its probity and proper custodianship of the land, in the minds of those who matter to us. So I for one am much happier about the safety of my investment here and feel confident that in the not too distant future, our faith in the management team will reap some rewards! And yes, I shall top up within a few weeks!"

[selwynslacker] 10/8/2013 13:57

A shame if so. I have read it a few times - there's just not enough in it to make a clear judgement.

Having said that cashflow must have been hit by the gold price as they are milling marginal low grade ore stocks, but I (just from looking at the recent RNSs) do not see why this is released now if there is any hope of a planning decision in the next 4-6 months, unless things have a taken a turn for the even worse..

No doubt we will see soon enough - so at least the end is in sight one way or another.

[bamboo2] 10/8/2013 12:07

This latest RNS reads like a Swan song. imo.

[fatso] 09/8/2013 17:45

Strategic review, blah blah blah...obviously curtains at last.

I see the better option for the brave: to buy management out, paying
Phelps and consortes 0.5p a share- say £1.25 M in all. That would allow to escape them with bruised nose, nursing the losses to put them against CGT. To pay off loans by Phelps to GAL- some £9M do I hear?
Then close the outfit down and wait until the pips squeak. Re-start some years into the future when PoG sensibly high .Appoint that man of strength, Martin Mc Guinness and few of his ilk to the Board of Directors. They would know how to persuade obstructive neighbours to be more cooperative in gold extraction venture.

[bageo] 09/8/2013 17:35

Interesting timing for a strategic review - with the economic study due shortly along with final stages of planning. Investment in more exploration as well as the mine could be a positive otherwise major exploration awaits cashflow from the ug mine.

[bamboo2] 29/7/2013 09:40

An interesting piece discussing the value of the landscape. (There is no gold in the white cliffs, but btw, it would provide the main raw material for a cement factory.)

In the case of Galantas, I guess the question is, "what's the price of the risk of damaging one of the thousands of breeding grounds of N Atlantic Salmon?"

=============================================================================

Dover's White Cliffs: Would you mine them for £1bn-worth of gold?

"But what if another kind of mineral was discovered inside the cliffs? Let's say, purely hypothetically, that the cliffs contain gold.

Now imagine that gleaming deposit of gold is valued at £10m. Would you agree to it being gouged out of the rock? Of course not. You'd say, "Don't be so grubby, didn't you learn any history at school?"

Upping the ante

But what if the gold was worth £1bn? At that price a few people might agree to let the diggers move in. After all, a new mine would create jobs and the Treasury would get another, very welcome, source of revenue. So would the National Trust.

There would be a protest movement, obviously, and I'm guessing that the majority would be outraged at the idea of sacrificing the cliffs for a mere billion. However, we would start to see a fracturing of public opinion, wouldn't we?

So let's up the ante. What if the deposit was in fact valued at £1tn? Yes, one trillion, almost the size of the national debt..."

[bageo] 23/7/2013 19:58

43-101 report is available - just having a read. In some ways more significant is the RNS comment about the information required for a permitting decision.

"With regard to progressing the underground mine, a more detailed economic study is under way. Two additional independent reports have been commissioned related to the facilitation of underground mine planning permits. To be delivered within the next few weeks, they are expected to close out remaining queries from statutory consultees and enable finalised responses. It is understood that, after finalised responses, the next stage of the process will be the consideration, by Planning Service Northern Ireland, of all consultation responses, to enable a recommendation to the Minister for determination. "

[bahamasoil] 16/7/2013 13:11

Durkan replaces Attwood as Environment Minister

[bamboo2] 10/7/2013 23:13

Hi bageo, looks like it might be worth setting up a cement factory nearby then. :)

[bageo] 10/7/2013 05:45

bamboo

Although this has a focus on acid generation, which as the recent tests results have shown isn't an issue at the Omagh site, this has some good information on water flow too.
hxxp://www.cdc.gov/niosh/mining/works/coversheet1016.html

A recent publication
hxxp://www.arcadis-us.com/Content/ArcadisUS/docs/Environment/mining/ARCADIS_2013_Cemented_Tailings_Preprint_SME_2013.pdf

There are also plenty of technical references on rock and paste properties, especially if have access to journals e.g.
hxxp://profs.engineering.uottawa.ca/fall/publications/
Fall, M., Pokharel M., (2010). Coupled effect of sulphate and temperature on the strength development of cemented backfill tailings: Portland cement paste backfill. Cement and Concrete Composite 32(10):819-828.
Fall, M., Nasir, O. (2010). Mechanical behaviour of the interface between cemented tailings backfill and retaining structures under shear loads. Journal of Geotechnical and Geological Engineering 26(6):779-790.
Fall, M., Célestin, J.C., Pokharel, M., Touré, M. (2010). A contribution to understanding the effects of temperature on the mechanical properties of cemented mine backfill. Engineering Geology 14 (3-4), 397-413.
Fall, M., Célestin, J.C., Sen, H.F (2010). Potential use of polymer-pastefill as waste containment barrier materials. Journal of Waste Management 30:2570-2578.
Fall, M., Adrien, D., Celestin, J.C., Pokharel, M., Touré, M. (2009). Saturated hydraulic conductivity of cemented paste backfill. Journal of Mineral Engineering 22(15):1307-1317.

[bamboo2] 09/7/2013 22:11

Hi bageo, on a garden scale I largely accept what you say.

However, on a practical basis, I doubt think that the kind of backfilling that will be required here will be possible in the manner you describe. We are talking about a multi-level mine, and short of backfilling with solid concrete, I can't see how it will be possible to satisfy the requirements of NH. In the real world there will always be voids and unavoidable settlement, that will alter the properties of the restoration, leading to further water ingress and subsequent erosion. Restoring an open pit is much easier than an underground mine.

Of course if the mine were almost anywhere else in the world, this would probably not be an issue, and the changes to local water drainage made by a small mine would be seen as an acceptable price to pay for economic development.

I would be very interested to see your examples of u/g mine restoration.

[bageo] 09/7/2013 21:09

There is nothing difficult about infill/backfill, the material properties can be designed to provide strength and also manage flow, this will be by blending material - including clean tailings, waste rock and cement to give the properties required.

I could give many examples or references if wanted on how this approach works, a simple none mining one is creating a garden pond - this can be lined with clay to give minimal flow out but if you wanted a bog for plants you would mix clay with other materials to get water retention but not puddles.


As a comparison it is interesting to look at the fact that Dalradian have been told they do not need to complete an EIA for their underground audit extension and trial mining. I don't understand how NIEA can take contrasting approaches to groundwater flow of an audit.

[bamboo2] 07/7/2013 17:43

This is the point that I think will be difficult to fulfil.

"Regarding Point 2 – Groundwater/Stream interaction upon closure; NIEA: NH acknowledges the receipt of information contained in the ES. As pointed out in Point 2 of the NIEA: NH letter dated 10 January 2013, the concern to be addressed is in relation to the use of granular infill. This approach would appear to leave a viable pathway for escape of groundwater under hydraulic pressure due to the removal of solid substrate, thereby reducing the capacity to feed the surrounding watercourses. Such circumstances have the potential to result in effects on the River Foyle and Tributaries SAC/ASSI and therefore required consideration. Details to assess such effects have not been provided at this stage."

[bahamasoil] 26/6/2013 19:21

Will Mr Attwood choose to keep his job in the Executive or can he survive on the wages of a normal Stormont member?



However, the Environment Minister Alex Attwood says that, if the SDLP remain in government in the autumn, he has the "nuclear option" of choosing not to move the bill at its next stage. So it might never reach the statute book.

[nat hart] 25/6/2013 10:46

"Alex Attwood opposed the proposals and warned they could run foul of European planning directives"

I'm afraid Mr Attwood and the green campaigners are living in a past that is no longer affordable or sustainable. The Northern Ireland government know that the people will not be forgiving if their jobs are sacrificed solely in favour of environmental issues.

I remember ...... A Russian Ambassador returning to Moscow some years ago was asked to describe how different life was in Britain. He replied that we were a very quaint nation that not only allowed perfectly good food to fly around but even had a royal society to protect them.

A dose of common sense has been required for some time now. Let's hope that Mr Attwood and followers come to realise that.

[bahamasoil] 25/6/2013 08:39

Applying more pressure on Mr Attwood