oilovlam
20 Dec 2016
Another name change! Why are they changing their name yet again? They must be bored. It does suggest that they aren't really focusing on important stuff - they have a load of difficult mine development to do over the next 18 months - so why is a name change required?I could see the change from Hambledon coming but not this one. Bizarre.
oilovlam
29 Nov 2016
Re: Realism at last "Maybe Putin could persuade one of his mates to offer 50p a share for the company as it is such a good deal."---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---I don't think Putin or his cello playing front men do business like that. I think they politely ask you to sell the company for £1 (not per share, for the company) and if you refuse they make you 'an enemy of the state', which means you spend a very, very long time in jail where you get treated rather unkindly.I don't know enough about Kazakhstan to say whether the Russians are a threat. I don't know how the Russians view the 'stans'. But it looks like Putin is trying to make a bigger Russia and the likes of Kazakhstan could be an easy target. It would be sods law that just when GBGR starts to deliver something will happen politically to take it away from the shareholders. At the moment they aren't producing very much but if they do start to reach 100,000 Oz then someone might say they want a piece of the cake (or even the whole thing) and just take it. Again, I don't know enough about Kazakh politics so I am probably talking out of my proverbial. If anyone is better informed please let me know.
AlphaCentauri
29 Nov 2016
Re: Realism at last Realism? I have been holding this share for the best part of ten years with an average price of 3p. Maybe Putin could persuade one of his mates to offer 50p a share for the company as it is such a good deal...!!! Hey ho.
oilovlam
29 Nov 2016
Realism at last Finally we have some realistic forecasts. 2017 is 40,000 Oz, 2018 is 60,000 Oz, after that 100,000 Oz. That makes more sense than going from zero production to 100,000 Oz in a couple months (which is what they seemed to suggest previously).Free gold....I like the sound of that.Dividends....yes please.They still have a lot to do over the next year or two. A lot to spend next year, so dividends will be small, if there are any at all. But things are looking encouraging....which probably means that Putin is suddenly going to annex that bit of Kazakhstan where the mine is and claim that his grandad owned the land & he wants it back (hopefully he doesn't see this message and thinks that's a good idea!!)
oilovlam
03 Oct 2016
Re: How low can she go? AlphaC, I suppose when one writes off an investment it is a bit of a bonus when it comes back to life. Nothing can make up for the trauma of an investment going wrong but it must feel good to get even some of that money back.Hambledon was full of big ideas, poorly executed and overestimated production targets (almost a pack of lies). The new team seem to be taking things in the right direction.....the next 6 months is the crunch point IMO, either they deliver on production or they will collapse. They need the revenue (and profits) to pay for the mine development.I haven't given up yet. It could turn out to be a good investment. But I'm not entirely comfortable about Kazakhstan, anything could happen there politically.
AlphaCentauri
03 Oct 2016
Re: How low can she go? My optimism is on the wane but I am holding for the endgame whatever happens. My othe "dog" share ASA (formerly MWA) has suddenly sprung into life when I was anticipating £10k down the pan. There is nothing quite like the thrill of risk and reward!
oilovlam
03 Sep 2016
How low can she go? Any ideas on how low the SP can go and when there will be some good production news?Winter is getting near and I suppose it will have some impact on how their development of the underground & ore extraction/processing gets on. I thought this would happen. You cannot develop a new mine and expect ore production to go from zero to full capacity. Indeed it sounds like they have an awful lot of development to do to get anywhere near 100,000 ounces per year. The big danger is that 'the family' cuts off funding. Then the shareholders would be left high and dry. Definitely not for widows & orphans. But there is potential.....not sure what kind though!!
oilovlam
26 Jun 2016
Miracle of miracles A minor miracle that HMB is seen as a safe haven after the leave vote.
next-time-lucky
08 Jun 2016
Re: Sturgeon Capital AC like you break even will need another rise back to the 3.5 mark. The key for the future is cash flow, profit would paved the way forward. Another gold bull market would be a BIG help. The end of the commodity bust is nigh. Still keeping my fingers crossed.
AlphaCentauri
07 Jun 2016
Sturgeon Capital The RNS tells us that Sturgeon Capital now have over 3% of GBGR in their funds. This should raise the share profile and hopefully the price. Looks an interesting niche fund. My only question now is what do I do when I hit breakeven? Hang on for another ten years! Are you still there OldGoat?!
oilovlam
02 Jun 2016
Re: Confused? 41,666 tonnes at 3g/tonne 80% recovery is
41,666 x 3 x .8)/31.1=3,215 Oz of gold/month38,584 Oz per yearObviously how soon they reach that rate of production is another matter. Gold grade could be better (with selective mining) or worse. Recovery rate could be better - unlikely to be worse because I think that recovery rate increases as the ore grade improves (but never say never). Then there is the climate....presumably cold weather will have less impact on the underground mine...but what about the 'paste fill plant'....concrete doesn't like cold weather does it.There are also the costs of the 'paste fill' to take into account (never mind the cost of the new plant...is that costed?). Concrete in that quantity costs money....they have the aggregate and presumably the water, but it sounds like a significant new cost.So many questions and things seem to be slipping towards 2019.It would be nice to know what their ore production is at the moment and the forecasts for the next year. Perhaps they are mining the 41,666 tonnes at this very moment (without 'paste fill') and the new plant is only needed to take ore production to a new level (1 million tonnes per year), but I don't know (based on the RNS's). Does anyone have any thoughts or a better understanding?
oilovlam
01 Jun 2016
Re: Confused? I thought there was some slippage to 2019 for 100,000 Oz production but I wasn't sure. These RNS's can play havoc with your memory. Like 'Animal Farm' and the 'commandments' written on the wall...every time you look at them they appear to be slightly different.But more important is how quickly they can ramp production (which I guess is close to zero at the moment) and whether they can significantly increase the quality of the ore by selective mining. If they slowly increase production then that would be bad. If they reach 500,000 tonnes quickly enough and the grade is reasonable then things will be OK. But I cannot tell when 500,000 tonnes is possible. "....annualised run-rate of 500,000 tonnes, starting from H2 2016"I read this as meaning that they will start reaching 41,666 tonnes per month from january 1st (at the latest). But they won't have the paste fill plant ready by then. So how is that possible?
next-time-lucky
01 Jun 2016
Re: Confused? Note in the RNS, the change of date from 2018 to 2019 for target production. The excavation of the declines is both time consuming and labour intensive; which seems to indicate that gold production will be around the break even for the year. Still hopeful that the family can deliver!
AlphaCentauri
01 Jun 2016
Re: Confused? I share your concerns but still not convinced that the shares are "worth something"!
oilovlam
01 Jun 2016
Confused? Are they actually digging any ore at the moment?There seems to be a long wait until they have the paste-filling plant (is that some sort of huge concrete mixer?) up and running. How vital is that to the mine design?Presumably they have planned all this but there seems to be something missing. Presumably they will attempt to produce underground ore by another method - not requiring the paste-fill - but how can they hope to produce an annualised run-rate of 500,000 tonnes "....starting from H2 2016"The cost savings seems like an attempt to keep the boat afloat....throw everything overboard that isn't nailed down. Hopefully key personnel are happy to get shares instead of cash.....they must be happy that those shares are worth something. I would like a explanation on how they will get enough ore until the paste-fill plant is ready some time in 2017 (hopefully). A couple guys with cement mixers mixing by hand perhaps!!
