Phoenix Copper Share Discussion Threads

[bumpa33] 19/1/2024 17:15

Let’s look at the facts in your “Project Fear” shall we RP?

Is the company broke? Yes
Is it surviving on a death spiral specialist loan? Yes
Has the company met ANY timelines it’s issued? No
Are the directors paid extortionately? Yes
Are the directors serial failures? Yes
Do the company have permits, approved plan of operations to enable investment? No
Does the company have feasibility reports to enable investment? No
Have multiple operators walked away from Empire since 1940? Yes
Is the empire resource highly disseminated? Yes
Has the company added anything to the JORC in its tenure? No
Does the company use social media to push more failed timelines? Yes


Project Moron.

[jasperthemonkeygod] 19/1/2024 17:02

I dabbled in and out of RMM and followed it for years.

we both did, Saucepan

I get where you're coming from, but PXC is a different animal

I did think PXC would buy RMM, maybe they looked at it, in any case it's been bought for a song by an Australian outfit, I'm sure you know

[saucepan] 19/1/2024 16:55

It is simply an example of what can, and often does, go wrong on AIM. The key similarities are a copper project in a low-risk jurisdiction; a Board of Directors who had "done it all before"; and how the general consensus early on was that RMM would likely be a multi-bagger given a bit of patience. The wheels started to come off RMM well before Covid.

I dabbled in and out of RMM and followed it for years. My gut feel (increasingly) is that there are similar possible resonances with PXC that may be worth heeding. You are of course entitled to dismiss them in the same way that I am entitled to point them out. You have only to dig into my positing history over the years (should you care to) to discover that I am not a serial deramper. Please don't dismiss me as one.

That said, I am happy to withdraw from further discussion until such time as there is significant news, positive or negative.

[retirementplan] 19/1/2024 15:59

What rot, saucepan. I told you only this morning to play nicely! That doesn't mean you briefly google a failed tier 1 copper/gold mine & present your case history (the lowest form of evidence) as evidence that PXC will suffer the same fate. Did you consider:
1. The Ming mine was an underground mine and not an open pit?
2. They had multiple inefficiencies and problems including needing to truck ore to mill, unable to do maintenance & repairs, resulting in not being able to feed their mill to capacity & also a stope collapse. Many other inefficiencies. I'm soooooo glad PXC are being meticulous with planning - the PFS will be a fantastic read when it's out.
3. They were struggling with all of the above in the middle of Covid, with the associated workforce and commodity price pressures.

Honestly! Now, play nicely children. 33 minutes left to shake as many hapless, naive, PIs, who can't do their own, deep, research out of their shares with your (includes the usual culprits, esp Bumpa33) Project Fear. 🤣

[saucepan] 19/1/2024 13:40

Rambler Metals and Mining. For those who have not looked at the case history of this, the parallels are uncanny.

April 2005 from mineweb.com:

Rambler Metals and Mining floats on AIM today (Friday 8th April) and is looking to revitalise the base metal mining industry in the Baie Verte peninsula of Newfoundland and Labrador. The company has raised £8 million (US$15 million) through the issue of 16 million shares at £0.50 apiecep, and has a market capitalisation of £20 million ($37 million). Rambler is headed by mining entrepreneur Harry Dobson, who with co director Brian Hinchcliffe was responsible for the rejuvenation of the Kirkland Lake gold-producing region in northern Ontario and has a similar intention with respect to Ming.

Rambler was established to invest in the base metals sector in “politically stable jurisdictions”, with a view to building into an intermediate base-metal mining company; Mr. Dobson believes that recent consolidation in the sector has left a void at this level of operation and is looking to be one of the companies to fill it.

Rambler’s first project is an exploration and drilling programme on the Rambler property. This was acquired from Altius Minerals Corporation in late February of this year in exchange for 12 million shares in the company, which gives Altius a 30% stake in Rambler. Rambler has also been granted the option to purchase 100,000 Altius shares at C$3.90, expiring on November 1 this year in order that Rambler may make the final share payment required to be paid by Altius under its option from the underlying property owner. Altius is regarded as the leading junior exploration company in Newfoundland and Labrador and has a royalty over Voisey’s Bay that will start generating revenue later this year.

Infra-structure in the area is good, with a provincial highway and power line crossing the property and with a deep-water port approximately 20km away. Altius is assigning to Rambler a right of first refusal to purchase a milling complex just short of two kilometres from the property, which has a demonstrated daily milling capacity of 1,500 tons.

The funds raised through the placing are to be used for an exploration programme on the property, which is at pre-feasibility stage. The property contains the Ming Mine, a former producer, the Ming West Mine and unexploited extensions of the local deposits, which are volcanogenic massive sulphides containing primarily gold, silver and copper and Altius will provide Rambler with its expertise in these deposits, notably in the guise of Dr. Geoff Thurlow, an Altius founder.

Production at Ming ran from 1971 to 1984 and was the largest mine in the Rambler camp on Baie Verte; production ceased when the workings reached the boundary of an adjoining property, which looks to host an extension of the Ming deposit. Ming West was discovered in November 1988.

Altius undertook digital compilation of mining and exploration data and a lithogeochemical programme on the property between 2001 and 2004 and its drilling programme suggests that there is a considerable extension of the Ming deposit, with a massive sulphide zone underlain by a broader footwall zone of mineralisation. The Footwall Zone is deep; Altius accessed it via a shaft that extends to a depth of 636 metres. Test milling as long ago as 1980 of a 2,296 ton sample grading 1.0% copper indicated that recoveries of greater than 85% were feasible.

The Ming mine typically graded 3.5% copper and 2.4g/t gold and two deep holes drilled in 2003, approximately 450 metres down plunge from the Ming deposit intersected a potentially significant zone of copper-gold mineralisation grading 3.0% copper and 2.8g/t gold over a width of 4.1m, and thus comparable in grade and thickness to the Ming deposit and drill intercepts suggest that the Ming deposit is open at depth. Two holes were drilled in 2004 with a view to confirming the underlying parallel Ming footwall zone; the first, aimed at confirming the deepest drill intersection, returned two mineralised sections with the first grading 2.32% copper over 12.1m and the second, deeper intersection graded 2.26% copper over 22.1m. The second returned four wide sections of slightly lower grade copper, ranging between 1.41% and 1.96%.

An exploration drift to the north of the Ming mine shortly before its closure had encountered very high grade native gold mineralisation near the northwest margin of the Ming deposit and one drill hole reportedly intersected 31.0g/t gold over 2.1 metres. A chip sample from a drift several hundred metres down plunge returned 17.2g/t gold over 2.7 metres, giving Rambler the potential to develop gold production as well as the primary copper target. In addition there is a new copper-rich massive sulphide zone that has been discovered to the north of Ming, grading up to 11.51% copper over 2.6 metres; this zone is open down plunge.

Rambler’s initial programme will comprise a 28,000 metres diamond drilling exercise to explore both Ming and the underlying footwall zone as well as additional targets. The second phase, should it prove necessary, will involve rehabilitation of underground workings with a view to developing an exploration programme for existing and new underground workings.

Harry Dobson and Brian Hinchcliffe have been in this position before and proved successful; can they make history repeat itself?

It all sounded a "no-brainer".

April 2023, Alliance News:

Rambler Metals & Mining PLC on Friday said it has "no means to continue to operate" as funds have dried up.

Rambler said it has no choice but to file for voluntary liquidation as it said it is unable to "pay its debts as they fall due".

The update from the mining and development company, which holds properties in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, follows Rambler's announcement last week that it was insolvent and filing for creditors voluntary liquidation.

[haveapunt1] 19/1/2024 13:07

Cromwell - there is plenty of speculation on both sides, including speculation that the bonds are close and finance WILL be done. You can’t criticize people for negative speculation when others are as bad with positive. This comes down to the company making poor choices and lack of communication on fundamental basics which in turn leads to speculation.

Everyone here has a view point, and no one has facts. Simple. It is based on individuals interpretation of information in the public domain, the actions of the company, and people’s perception. All of these are valid which ever way you view it.

Rose tinted glasses are a dangerous thing when investing, as is investing on emotion, trying to convince yourself your viewpoint is right through fear of not being right and losing capital.

At this juncture there is too many ifs and buts, too much cloak and dagger, and you’ve been told a raise is coming. In what form no one knows, but a raise.

If the bonds fail, it’s mega dilution (look at the likes of SML and what happened to SXX).

Everyone is entitled to their views, all of which are valid in there own right

[kaos3] 19/1/2024 12:18

Strenght of the opinion depends on the number of shares.

Like in science.

One discovers something. 1000 others sign a letter against.

His discovery becomes invalid.

What orbits what....

That is a fact

[bumpa33] 19/1/2024 12:13

People don’t want “inside information”, they merely want “information” that can be relied upon and all the way along the company have failed spectacularly to provide that.

The well worn and tedious reply to those that have picked up on the fact that the company can’t do this most simple of things appears to be “you don’t have any shares so your viewpoint is invalid” when precisely for this reason our viewpoint is more valid than those who hold the shares and appear unable to be objective whilst doing so.

Those of us who do “our research” rely both on experience and digging far deeper than reading the company website, their RNS releases and listening to the extortionately well paid BoD.

[cromw3ll] 19/1/2024 12:02

Imo it seems some want to be told inside information before investing their money, that is plainly ridiculous situation.
There is so much information already, I suggest re-reading the rns's go to the website and re-read the prospects etc.
I think its not long term investors shouting the most but active investors who are buying and selling daily to try and accumulate more shares, which i have no problem but the de-ramping and speculation is tedious, so move on as its clear as daylight what games your playing.

[kaos3] 19/1/2024 11:55

Btw optimisation never ends in math term. It is just approaching optimum and never gets there.

I just love how clever their ir is.

Knowledge of math and psychology in action.

Not many are able to do it. Superb

[sipptrader88] 19/1/2024 11:36

Pretty much agree greyingsurfer.....they wouldn't want to e.g. tell the Investor doing DD....that plan B and C are difficult and his is the best proposal by far....indeed realistically the only sensible option (I'm only guessing an example).

and perhaps the 95% EM is ready just awaiting some final lab testing to slot in the figures etc. (again I'm only guessing an example).

[kaos3] 19/1/2024 10:33

Agree fully

[greyingsurfer] 19/1/2024 10:13

Right, so you would take the view I would agree with that they shouldn't have issued the RNS? As they have nothing substantive they are able to communicate? A good position to take. But reading this board it's clear that many here don't agree with that. They want something to be said. And, by implication things that either can't be communicated or to which there is no clear answer. Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

As for concerns about funding not happening before the end of March? Really?? Do you think anyone inside or outside the co doesn't share those? But that doesn't mean they are in a position where it's possible or sensible to make statements about it, while a raft of negotiations and planning are certainly going on.

[haveapunt1] 19/1/2024 10:08

Boonboon, it’s not happening before March. If indeed DD is only now being carried out it’s months. This is the purpose to the new RF facility for working capital. If they were confident the bonds would close before that date they wouldn’t be getting new facility. At best they are being cautious (again despite the odd “two week extensions”?) meaning best case it’s incredibly tight.

My guess is the little extension was to conclude discussions and in that period something happened which the company won’t declare, followed by the RNS re needing a new facility.

On the only way the ship is being steadied is if the board come out from hiding and treat the OWNERS of the company with respect.

[boonboon] 19/1/2024 10:02

Clearly? They mentioned feasibility study in 2nd quarter. In September they said by end of 2023. Why such a long delay? How does this impact bond timing? Nothing mentioned on that? As I've got real concerns if it doesn't happen before 23rd of March.

[haveapunt1] 19/1/2024 10:02

“Yesterday they did communicate. ”

No.

They issues a pointless RNS to attempt to steady the ship which again was totally naive to think issuing a padded out RNS to confirm to everyone that the economic model
Is indeed delayed by 3-4 months from the Q4 2023 timeline and in the same breath saying “The Company endeavors to meet the timelines it develops for itself and shareholders”

Incompetent and naive.

If the words “we will communicate when we have something appropriate to say” means anything, then yesterday’s RNS shows they should have taken their own advise.

The RNS communicated nothing other than a poor attempt to take the heat away from the elephant in the room. No more no less.

[haveapunt1] 19/1/2024 09:57

Also, what level of interest from investors? Another area the company court easily shed light on through an investor meet company or similar. There is interest and there is serious interest, yet investors are left second guessing.

Economic model 99.5% complete - but it’s going to take another 3-4 months to finish that 0.5% when the commercial metrics where issues over a year ago and openly published though PR? Hopefully you see my point re the company making it up as they go along. They have had months to finish the economic plan, and it’s naive not to think doing this would give them a huge carrot to dangle in front of potential investors yet they seem to have gone to the bond market with “yeah mate we think it’s about $800 revenue”. Naive.

The commercial viability should have been totally nailed before even looking at investors parting with $80mil on a company with assests to support this of less the one third.

As I say, it’s either utter naivety, or incompetence - if I am wrong I apologise but this is where the company need to help investors to understand!

I’d also love to question them on their plans for cost reductions as a board of directors to show they are with shareholders rather than simply raising funds to self fund their salaries

[williamcooper104] 19/1/2024 09:56

Good points though on 1 you would be prejudicing funding if you tell what might be the only investor interested that they are the only investor interested

[greyingsurfer] 19/1/2024 09:51

So because it might frustrate some people you don't do anything.

Yesterday they did communicate. Clearly all that they felt could be communicated at this stage. And look at the response from those now complaining of lack of cummunication?

[haveapunt1] 19/1/2024 09:47

Donald. The company can share. For example:

1. How many investors are showing interest and how many are carrying out DD
2. Explanation why the company issued a two week extension to “conclude discussions” yet they missed all dates. What weren’t wrong and caused such a delay (naive board at best if they are only NOW doing DD!)
3. Options on RF being considered - non dilutive, conversion shares etc
4. Current cash runway (interims said well into 2024 yet there we are looking at a raise end of 2023!)
5. Why did the company target economic model Q4 2023 yet are now looking at some 4 months later
6. Plans it can’t vet bonds away- what are they working on as an alternative


Ultimately you can’t be in advance discussions for 12 months unless certain investors pulled the plug during the period and new ones had to be attracted. The company just need to be honest rather than
Issuing RNSs this week for the sake of it.


All this “nothing to say” is simply rubbish. It’s about communication and courtesy to shareholder, and frankly if they have had nothing to say for the last 12 months I would be incredibly worried at what’s going on behind the scenes re progress!

[copper copper] 19/1/2024 09:36

To be fair to DP, I'd much rather he didn't do presentations. I'd much rather he didn't get paid anything at all, for doing nothing at all. Instead, he gets paid something, for doing nothing at all. In fact, he used to comment impartially, which was probably more helpful that being paid to not say the bad bits.

But don't worry all, as the fact that the shares are available to the American market, will be transformational for the company... time warp!!

And also, Ryan doesn't need the money for 3 weeks.

Oh, and we'll mess around with a few two-week loan extensions to try get buy some time, and get everyone excited.

Oh... and there has been something much bigger than all this going on for two years that they can't talk about... can't wait to hear about it.

[kaos3] 19/1/2024 09:28

Wrong. Communication was evacuated from themselfs

So they pay your money to somebody else to communicate. And he takes the (un)deserved heat?

Wise BOD

[boonboon] 19/1/2024 09:26

So because it might frustrate some people you don't do anything. This was a company with some of the best investor communications I've ever seen, when things were going well.As soon as they've hit some issues pretty much all communication has stopped.

[boonboon] 19/1/2024 09:23

It just comes across that the directors don't want to face tough questions.

[donald pond] 19/1/2024 09:22

We could. But if we can't share the economic model or say anything meaningful about funding it would just frustrate everyone. We will communicate everything as soon as we can. That's what we all want