independent analysis, page-91

First 91 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
shadowboxer1

2,755 Posts.

28/08/14

10:32

Post #: 13885888
Share

Originally posted by ozblue ↑

SB,

"The ore sorter that arrived on site wasn't new"

Well that is the first time I've heard that. Nobody bothered to mention it last year, why not?

"During the quarter the Company conducted factory testing of various types of ore sorters, and after very pleasing results arranged for a unit to be delivered to Rocklands."

This was well after they had been in the box cut and knew of large nuggets. "very pleasing results" would tend to indicate they had taken large nuggets into consideration. It would also tend to indicate they had bought a new one from the factory. If, in fact it was different to this, then why not say what was happening in the quarterly?
Nothing at the AGM meeting and presentation, nor on the mine tour suggested anything other than this was THE ore-sorter and was capable of doing the full job required of it. I asked SPECIFICALLY about the ore-sorters capability, and was assured that it had been carefully selected to do the required job. Nothing at any stage was there anything mentioned about it being a trial one. (I'm talking very senior people, not person, in the company here)

Everytime someone comes along to smooth out the 'trial ore-sorter' issue, it just reminds me of why I sold down so many of my shares. There is a distinct, and possibly deliberate lack of clarity in the information Cudeco releases.
The old ore-sorter only became a 'trial ore-sorter' in the Successful ore-sorter trial announcement on 29th April. On NO occasion before that had it been called anything but 'the companies ore-sorter'.

If the company had been calling it a 'trial ore-sorter' from the beginning, then that would have been accurate reporting. But they didn't.
Do you and Cudeco really think the investing public that gullible that they wouldn't notice they made a mistake?

Expand

"In preparation for trial processing of first ore"
What does that mean then? Ozblue if you could go back to the quarterly link I gave and look at the photo you can see its not new. If they owned it I can't understand why they haven't been using it for the last 6 months, it's capable just low tonnage.

CDU Price at posting: $1.75 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
8 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

Trump Victory Sends Bitcoin Surging Above $75K – Is $100K Next?

MKT

The ASX can overlook its Telecomm small-caps. Here’s one diversified brand with an international footprint

Palladium's the newest geopolitical hot commodity. But ASX exposure is limited

IMU

Imugene kicks off Australian trial for blood cancer treatment

Trump is President Again: What Does This Mean for Crypto?

FG1

Flynn Gold reaches milestone exploration target for Golden Ridge

HotCopper Highlights: Your most watched and most discussed stocks this week

UBI

Universal Biosensors flat despite fresh deal with US medical product distributor

Week 45 Wrap: Combat sports usher in Trump 2.0 – or is it male insecurity?; RBA boring; Propane suggests China alive

MMI

Metro Mining inks bauxite offtake contracts into 2026 with Chinese m