Hi Richtar,I was thinking about same thing but was leaning...

Hi Richtar,

I was thinking about same thing but was leaning toward possibility that the results of drill campaign (due anytime now) might be linked to downstream finance, not upstream. Here is how it worked in my mind;

Company has said beneficiated ore (in existing stockpiles) is to be sold rather than processed in AD. Net proceeds can then used to reduce external funding for upstream capex. Ok, i accept that.

There is ~127,000 tonnes in stockpile from memory (please correct me if that’s wrong). Mining costs have already been incurred. Proceeds from selling all available could/should/would approx. cover Namibia capex.

Unlike the ore in stockpiles, if LPD wanted to utilise results of the current drill results to self-fund Namibia concentrator then they will first need to assess mining and associated costs, before assessing volumes required to break even and then what extra volume is required to generate enough funds for Namibia capex. IMO cost of mining small volumes would be too high to justify this.

I cannot know for sure but i can speculate with the best of them…

Company has also said that ore in existing stockpiles are now JORC’d and are included in recently updated feasibility studies. Equates to ~2yrs of feed for the downstream plant. The volume of stockpile ore actually sold would then need to be replaced with new discoveries in order to restore the recently updated project metrics. Any new resources discovered will first be used to backfill the eroded DFS metrics. This seems an essential step if LPD wants to maintain the chances of eventually securing downstream funding for P1 in AD.

This is why it seems to me that current drill results might serve upstream finance rather than downstream finance.

Not wedded to these ideas. Just trying to keep up with the expanding mystery.

Go the slow ‘pus
AM47