Ann: Iron Ore Scoping Study Update, page-21

@FiendishRedbeard

3 other items you should have considered with Carpentaria Resources Limited's (ASX: CAP) Hawsons project:

1. Yield % (or mass recovery) of the iron ore;
2. Hawsons project was declared a ‘State Significant Development’ by the New South Wales Government during 2012; and
3. Native title has apparently been extinguished at the Hawsons project.


"Don't think there is enough info yet on HAV to say if they are higher or lower capex intensity compared to CAP. Probably both in the same ball park being low grade but with good access to infrastructure"

Concur.

However, being 8-12 kms from the Transcontinental Railway for HAV is a huge advantage for Grants project and Grants Iron Ore Basin ('GIB') project respectively, compared with CAP's Hawsons project of ~60 kms re: potential CAPEX savings.


"The CAP ore I think is a bit different, softer and a bit easier to process compared to hard rock plus quality is unmatched"

Maybe you didn't see this post earlier this month by @peterbax

At Post #:38041546 Dr Giles is quoted as saying "The answer is that the GIB ore is very similar to Hawsons - it is the relatively soft siltstone that readily liberates the iron minerals as you say. Hawson's has higher magnetite content, which means they can beneficiate to a slightly higher grade (67% Fe) than our more hematite rich ore (magnetite is Fe3O4 and hematite is Fe2O3 - so magnetite has a slightly higher Fe:O ratio)".

The iron ore across the Braemar Iron Formation (in which the Hawsons project, Razorback Iron project, Grants/Maldorky/Grants Iron Ore Basin projects are located) is definitely not hard rock. Magnetite ores from the Braemar iron region are notable for being comparably softer than magnetite ores from the other iron regions.

Favourable factors for mining include very large resource inventories, relatively simple geology and lower values for hardness and grind indices, with relatively low levels of impurities.

It is a completely different iron ore to the magnetite projects in Western Australia and at SIMEC Mining's Middleback Range location in South Australia. See this PIRSA article below for further the geological differences:

http://www.energymining.sa.gov.au/m...articles/magnetite_south_australias_potential


"perhaps it would trade at $20-30/t premium or more compared to a 65% Fe"

The premium will not be that high, compared to 65% Fe concentrate.

The Hawsons project is 70% Fe concentrate. CAP said in its PFS document (under 'Key Hawsons PFS assumptions' table - see link below) between 65% and 70% the premium is: 5 x Fe 1% US$1.10. Total US$5.50 per tonne.

The 15 April 2019 FE VIU (see Post #:38262112) for each 1% is US$1.41 per tonne. So 5 x Fe 1% US$1.41 or US$7.05 per tonne.

https://www.carpentariares.com.au/hawsons-iron-project-detail-report/

While CAP has a 70% Fe concentrate grade, it is the yield % (or mass recovery of Fe) that is the key difference.

For me, logistics, yield and size (if the Exploration Target is achieved) are the clear winners at Grants and the GIB for me. See Post #: 37981708


"HAV management seem all over the place with projects and past record, prefer the CAP model with single focus"

Concur.

I just wish we had the Carpentaria Resources Limited Board of Directors and Management for dealing with SIMEC Mining, as the CAP Directors and Management have extensive iron ore experience at every level.

I have said before that HAV has had a 'Shotgun' approach with projects.

Others have referred to it as the 'Dory' approach.

Cheers

These are only my random thoughts and it does not constitute investment advice. Before acting on any information you read and before making any financial or investment decisions, you should always consult your advisor(s) or other relevant professional experts.