Frequently asked Questions
When is the next Significant News Update?
As of 19/11/2020 the following is expected into 2020
DEC AGM – Date of 8th December 09:30am
Scally info. + 3 Months, Results (with possible interim as well).
Nov Results i(n DEC)
Dec Results 28th Jan
NCM Half Year 11th Feb
March Quarterlies 29th April
June Quarterlies 22nd July
How many exploration sites do Greatland Gold have?
As at July 2020, Greatland had 6 exploration sites: 4 in Western Australia: Paterson, Panorama, Ernest Giles, and Bromus; and 2 in Tasmania: Firetower, and Warrantina.
What is Havieron?
Havieron (tenement (E45/4701) is located in the North West of Australia, it is part of Western Australia, 1300km North East of Perth 400km South of Broome. and is part of the Patterson Hills, in the East Pilbara Shire, and contains 43 Graticules (more info on those below).
Havieron is also the name given to a small 12 x 12 Squared area in blocks in the south-east corner of the plot that is the focus of the exploration for Greatland gold and its joint venture with Newcrest Mining. upon the request for a licence to mine, the 12 blocks now have a tenement of M45/1287. https://greatlandgold.com/paterson/
What is Scallywag?
Scallywag, is located within the Havieron E45/4701 block 5-6km West of current operations. Unlike Havieron, (the target of drilling (19/2020), Scallywag compromises of 4 areas of interest, Kracken, Barbossa, Blackbeard and London.
(From the Greatland Gold Website, (https://greatlandgold.com/paterson/)
- Kraken: A high intensity ‘bulls-eye’ magnetic anomaly with the same amplitude, character and depth extent as observed at Havieron. IP results indicate a strong chargeability anomaly coincident with the Kraken magnetic anomaly.
- Barbossa: A large 2km by 1km residual gravity anomaly located in a structural corridor 3.5km west of the hinge of the Scallywag dome. Barbossa has semi-coincident gravity and IP chargeability anomalies.
- Blackbeard: An elongate 2.6km by 400m ultra-high intensity magnetic anomaly with a coincident moderate amplitude gravity feature. The IP chargeability response at Blackbeard is observed over 800m of strike.
- London: Located in a gravity low interpreted to be an intrusive rock within the hinge zone of the Scallywag antiform. The London target IP response is seen over 400m of strike as discrete chargeability anomalies.
What about BlackHills, What is that?
Once you reach the top of the E45/4701 tenement, you reach Black hills (E45/4512). much smaller than Havieron (8 Graticules). consists of 5 areas of interest Rogers, Eastern, Black Hills North, Northern Granites, and Parlay. – Black Hills South is also part of this area of interest but is in the main tenement.
It as been explored briefly in 2019 with Ip Surveys, and Ground Gravity Surveys, but to date, no work has commenced on this. https://greatlandgold.com/paterson/
Patterson Range East…
25KM north of Havieron, is Patterson Range East E45/4928 acquired in 2018, it has 4 main areas of interest, Goliath, Los Diablos, Prefect and Atlantis. ther have been both Geo Chemical and Ground Gravity Surveys carried out in 2019, Full results can be found on this page. https://greatlandgold.com/paterson/
20k South South East, lats 65k of Greatland Golds newest prospective tenement.
It is awaiting final approval for prospecting by the Western Australia Authorities.
Why did Newcrest give up Havieron and Scallywag, and its surrounding areas?
From PI “Hydro”
Basically, what they describe is a series of technical problems at Scallywag and Havieron, that essentially buggered up their drilling campaign. The overlying Permian Sandstone and mudstone were described as being ‘unconsolidated’ (ie quite soft sandy sandstones). It appears the drilling rigs back then in the ’90s were limited to c450-500m depth tops. But only in good ground – ie consolidated or hard rock. What happened was I gather, the drills were breaking down due to these frictional issues and the rigs not being capable of the loading required to get through such soft deep overlying cover material. It was just a limit of the available technology at the time. That led to the poor drilling results and the failure to identify Havieron or Scally from actual drill cores. Whilst they realised/suggested Havieron was worthy of further investigation – as they detected some alteration – this was never followed up due to the gold price being $300/oz. The tenements cost money to maintain so they let them go.
Edited post to keep authors spell-checker happy.
Does Greatland have enough cash?
The writers of this page, are not qualified to comment on the financial status of this company, However, the directors are happy and confident with the group’s financial position. you can read more about it on the groups latest RNS.
Why do people talk about the Martu people?
The Martu are indigenous to the Great Sandy Desert, within the Pilbara region of Western Australia. The licences of E45/4701 and E45/4512 are located in their Native Title.
Before any work can commence on this land, the WDLAC (Western Dessert Land Aboriginal Corporation) must give consent.
Greatland gold needs and will build a strong relationship with the Martu, as they will supply a local workforce, and benefit from the mine being on their land.
Who are Newcrest Mining Limited?
“Newcrest is the largest gold producer listed on the Australian Securities Exchange and one of the world’s largest gold mining companies.” https://www.newcrest.com/about-newcrest/our-company
In 2019 Greatland Gold and Newcrest Mining agreed on a deal, to explore and develop the Havieron Area, They will over a period of time earn the right to own, 70% of 12 blocks in the south-east of E45/4701, The agreement, including Joint Venture, and Tolling principles, Newcrest also have first right refusal over Black hills, and Patterson range east. Further information: https://greatlandgold.com/paterson/
What is a “farm in” agreement?
The term “farm-in” describes activities governed by an agreement between parties in relation to
ownership, exploration and exploitation of a mining tenement. However, the form that farm-ins take can
vary enormously because the needs, motivations and drivers of the parties vary from case to case.”
What is a Joint Venture?
As the above discussion has shown, the concept of a “joint venture” has no clear legal or common
meaning. In some cases, farm-ins may be joint ventures. In others, they may be partnerships. But in
many cases, the distinction will be blurred such that a conservative approach finds simply contractual
relationships between the parties. Parliament chose not to define the term “joint venture” suggesting that,
in its view, it is a term that can be understood to have a common meaning. However, Parliament did
decide that a joint venture for GST purposes will not include a partnership. This exclusion does not
sufficiently delineate which arrangements come within the scope of the term.
What is JORC
JORC – Joint Ore Reserves Committee
The Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves (‘the JORC Code’) is a professional code of practice that sets minimum standards for Public Reporting of minerals Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves.
The JORC Code provides a mandatory system for the classification of minerals Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves according to the levels of confidence in geological knowledge and technical and economic considerations in Public Reports.
Public Reports prepared in accordance with the JORC Code are reports prepared for the purpose of informing investors or potential investors and their advisors. They include but are not limited to, annual and quarterly company reports, press releases, information memoranda, technical papers, website postings and public presentations of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves estimate.”
Further information and reading can be found here
What is “Telfer” and why is it relevant to GGP?
“Telfer is a fly-in-fly-out mine in the Great Sandy Desert in the Pilbara of Western Australia.”
tracing its history back to 1977 Telfer has been a mine for a long time, it is currently a fly in fly out mine, it has been in its current form since around 2004, after a $1 billion redevelopment program announced in 2002. it is the largest mine in the area, the mine produces both gold D’ore, and Copper-Gold concentrate.
Telfer contains a processing plant, where it readies gold d’ore for the Perth Mint, and Gold Copper concentrates for overseas smelting.
If the decision to mine Havieron happens, the joint venture between Newcrest mining, and Greatland gold, will see Telfer process its ore on a toll process basis.
What is “toll processing”?
Toll unit processing is where a product (gold) is taken to a plant and processed for a pre agreed price. under the joint venture agreement the gold from Havieron (should it become a mine) will be transported to Telfer and processed,
This is a brilliant deal for Greatland Gold, as it reduces the startup costs, reduces the need for development at the havieron site, no permits, and best of all, no further investment, apart from the transportation method.
What is the real number of shares in issue?
Because the company has outstanding warrants and options, the number of shares outstanding changes most months. Full details of currently outstanding shares, options, warrants, and contingent liability shares can be found here: https://greatlandgold.com/company/
What are warrants?
(Thank you to “TakingMyTime” on the LSE share chat board for this information.)
Last 12 August, GGP raised funds for exploration by issuing new shares. You can read about it here: https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/GGP/greatland-gold-plc-greatland-raises-42m-and-appoints-joint-broker-q9mgbp276msbrhc.html
Briefly, they sold 225m shares at 1.85p per share. That was a good approximation of the market price at the time. Since the new shareholders weren’t getting a discount to market price, they were instead offered another incentive — warrants on a 1-1 basis. For every share they purchased, they got a warrant for another share which they could purchase at 2.5p per share. Those warrants were good for 2 years, if they aren’t exercised by August 2021 they expire.
Obviously, it made no sense back then for warrant holders to pay 2.5p per share, they could just buy them in the market for around 1.85p. But now, it makes lots of sense for them to do so, since those shares today are worth around 12p (depending on what mood the MMs are in at the time you sell, of course, LOL).
These are the warrants that are being talked about. Basically, it’s a contingent liability for the company that they have to sell these shares to the warrant holders at this absurdly low price (given today’s market) anytime the warrant holder says, “Do it now.” The drawback is it dilutes the shares. The advantage is that it gives GGP more cash to drill holes wherever on God’s blessed earth GH and CB choose.
Right. So here’s part two. As you said, “the warrant holders buy them at 2.5p and sell them at 12p,” and as you said, “fair dues.” No one should complain about it, we might not be where we are if they hadn’t put up cash back then.
Except, maybe not. There’s no guarantee that the warrant holders who are exercising their warrants are selling — but probably most of them are. Their warrants don’t expire until next year, so why would they exercise them now, and pay that 2.5p / share, if they aren’t intending to sell them? There’s at least a few reasons they might be exercising and holding.
1. There might be tax considerations. Depending on where the warrant holders live, they might have a big tax hit when they exercise the warrants at a price far lower than the market price. Different jurisdictions have different tax rules. It might save them a lot of money on taxes to do it now when the price difference is 10p rather than next year when it is maybe 20 or 30p.
2. I haven’t researched the terms of the warrants, but they might not have the right to convert and have a vote if there’s a takeover offer (hostile or otherwise). If they don’t have that right, they may want to convert now so they have actual voting shares if that happens. If a warrant holder thinks that is imminent they might put up the cash to convert now.
3. They might just feel uncomfortable about the thing and want it done. Most people won’t be this way but some will. Maybe they want the liquidity immediately if they need it. Maybe they just aren’t logical and so won’t wait, even though from a purely mathematical / logical perspective it makes sense to wait. Whatever the reason, they are doing it.
4. Maybe they want to increase their shareholding on a break-even cash perspective. They exercise their warrants and sell 20% of the new shares, and get their money back. This isn’t entirely logical, either, logically it only makes sense to exercise the shares you want to sell, but people do that kind of thing.
Some of all those things may be happening, but mostly, people who exercise warrants early are doing so because they want to sell. So those who say the selling is probably warrant holders are certainly at least partly right.
Note: The warrant holders will certainly have the right to fully take part in any takeover, so the warrants should be included in any calculation of the distribution of takeover proceeds. I suspect they also will have the right to exercise the warrant and have a vote, despite what I said above — it will be in the documentation, one way or another. Also, warrant holders will undoubtedly exercise if there were to be a special dividend after, for instance, a sale of part or all of our share of Havieron.
Apologies if I’ve made any mistakes in these last couple of posts but I think that should give a reasonably clear picture of what’s up with the warrants.
What is Block Caving
Here is a small article that should help explain.
Sampling Techniques and Data.
Core samples are obtained from core drilling in Proterozoic basement lithologies. PQ-HQ and NQ diameter core was drilled on a 6m run. The core was cut using an automated core-cutter and half core sampled at 1m intervals with breaks for major geological changes. Sampling intervals range from 0.2 – 1.0m. Cover sequences were not sampled.
Permian Paterson Formation cover sequence was drilled using mud rotary drilling. Depths of cover typically observed to approximately 420m vertically below surface. Steel casing was emplaced to secure the pre-collar.
Core drilling was advanced from the base of the cover sequence with PQ3, HQ3 and NQ2 diameter coring configuration. Core from inclined drill holes are oriented on 3m and 6m runs using an electronic core orientation tool (Reflex ACT III). At the end of each run, the bottom of hole position is marked by the driller, which is later transferred to the whole drill core run length with a bottom of the hole reference line.
Drill sample recovery
Core recovery is systematically recorded from the commencement of coring to end of the hole, by reconciling against driller’s depth blocks in each core tray with data recorded in the database. Drillers depth blocks provided the depth, interval of core recovered, and interval of core drilled.
Core recoveries were typically 100%, with isolated zones of lower recovery.
Cover sequence drilling by the mud-rotary drilling did not yield recoverable samples.
(Sept Qtr 2020) Geological logging recorded qualitative descriptions of lithology, alteration, mineralisation, veining, and structure (for all core drilled – 24,644m from 34 drill holes, all intersecting mineralisation), including orientation of key geological features.
Geotechnical measurements were recorded including Rock Quality Designation (RQD) fracture frequency, solid core
recovery and qualitative rock strength measurements. Magnetic susceptibility measurements were recorded every metre. The bulk density of selected drill core intervals was determined at the site on whole core samples.
All geological and geotechnical logging was conducted at Havieron site.
Digital data logging was captured on diamond drill core intervals only, and all data validated and stored in an acQuire database.
All drill cores were photographed, prior to cutting and/or sampling the core.
Sub-sampling Techniques and Sample Preparation
Sampling, sample preparation and quality control protocols are considered appropriate for the material being sampled. The Core was cut and sampled at the Telfer and Havieron core processing facility. Half core samples were collected in prenumbered calico bags and grouped in plastic bags for dispatch to the laboratory. Sample weights typically varied from 0.5 to 4kg. Sample sizes are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation. Drill core samples were freighted by air and road to the laboratory.
Sample preparation was conducted at the independent ISO17025 accredited Intertek Laboratory, Perth (Intertek).
Samples were dried at 105oC and crushed to 95% passing 4.75mm, and then split to obtain up to 3kg sub-sample, which was pulverised (using LM5) to produce a pulped product with the minimum standard of 95% passing 106μm.
Duplicate samples were collected from crush and pulp samples at a rate of 1:20. Duplicate results show an acceptable level of variability for the material sampled and style of mineralisation.
Periodic size checks (1:20) for crush and pulp samples and sample weights are provided by the laboratory and recorded in the acQuire database.
Quality of Assay Data and Laboratory Tests
Assaying of drill core samples was conducted at Intertek. All samples were assayed for 48 elements using a 4-acid
digestion followed by ICP-AES/ICP-MS determination (method 4A/MS907). Gold analyses were determined by 50g fire assay with AAS finish (method FA50N/AA).
Sampling and assaying quality control procedures consisted of inclusion of certified reference material (CRMs), coarse residue and pulp duplicates with each batch (at least 1:20).
Assays of quality control samples were compared with reference samples in acQuire database and verified as
acceptable prior to the use of data from analysed batches. Laboratory quality control data, including laboratory standards, blanks, duplicates, repeats and grind size results are captured in the acQuire database and assessed for accuracy and precision for recent data. Extended quality control programs including pulp samples submitted to an umpire laboratory and combined with more extensive re-submission programs have been completed.
Analysis of the available quality control sample assay results indicates that an acceptable level of accuracy and precision has been achieved and the database contains no analytical data that has been numerically manipulated.
The assaying techniques and quality control protocols used are considered appropriate for the data to be used for
reporting exploration drilling results.
Verification of Sampling and Assaying
Sampling intervals defined by the geologist are electronically assigned sample identification numbers prior to core
cutting. Corresponding sample numbers matching pre-labelled calico bags are assigned to each interval.
All sampling and assay information were stored in a secure acQuire database with restricted access.
Electronically generated sample submission forms providing the sample identification number accompany each
submission to the laboratory. Assay results from the laboratory with corresponding sample identification are loaded
directly into the Acquire database.
Assessment of reported significant assay intervals was verified by re-logging of diamond drill core intervals and
assessment of high-resolution core photography. The verification of significant intersections has been completed by
company personnel and the Competent Person/Qualified Person.
No adjustments are made to assay data, and no twinned holes have been completed. Drilling intersects mineralisation at various angles.
There are no currently known drilling, sampling, recovery, or other factors that could materially affect the accuracy or reliability of the data.
Location of Data Points
Drill collar locations were surveyed using a differential GPS with GNSS with a stated accuracy of +/- 0.5m for all drill
Drill rig alignment was attained using an electronic azimuth aligner. The downhole survey was collected at 6-12m intervals in the cover sequence and every 6 to 30m in diamond drill core segments of the drill hole using single shot (AxisMining Champ Gyro). The single-shot surveys have been validated using the continuous survey to surface (Axis Mining Champ) along with a selection of drill holes re-surveyed by an external survey contractor using a DeviGyro tool – confirming sufficient accuracy for downhole spatial recording.
Topographic control is established from SRTM (1 second) topographic data and derived digital elevation model. The
the topography is generally low relief to flat, with an average elevation of 265 m, within dune corridors.
All collar coordinates are provided in the Geocentric Datum of Australian (GDA94 Zone 51). All relative depth information is reported in Australian Height Datum (AHD).
Data Spacing and Distribution
The drill hole spacing ranges from 50–100m within the south-eastern Crescent sulphide zone to 50-300m in lateral
the extent within the breccia zone over an area of ~2km2.
Significant assay intercepts remain open. Further drilling is required to determine the extent of currently defined
mineralisation. No sample compositing is applied to samples.
The Orientation of Data in Relation to Geological Structure
Drill holes exploring the extents of the Havieron mineral system intersect moderately dipping carbonate and siliclastic sedimentary facies, mineralised breccia and sub-vertical intrusive lithologies. Geological modelling has been interpreted from historic and Newcrest drill holes. Variable brecciation, alteration and sulphide mineralisation is observed with a footprint with dimensions of 650m x 350m trending in a north-west orientation and over 900m in vertical extent below cover.
The subvertical southeast high grade arcuate crescent sulphide zone has an average thickness of 20m and has been
defined over a strike length of up to 550m, and over 600m in vertical extent below cover.
Drilling direction is oriented to intersect the steeply dipping high-grade sulphide mineralisation zones at an intersection angle of greater than 40 degrees. The drilled length of reported intersections is typically greater than true width of mineralisation.
The security of samples is controlled by tracking samples from drill rig to the database.
Drill core was delivered from the drill rig to the Havieron core yard every shift. On completion of geological and
geotechnical logging, the core was transported by vehicle to Telfer core processing facility by Newcrest personnel.
High-resolution core photography and cutting of drill core was undertaken at the Havieron or Telfer core processing
Samples were freighted in sealed bags by air and road to the Laboratory and in the custody of Newcrest
representatives. Sample numbers are generated directly from the database. All samples are collected in pre-numbered calico bags. Verification of sample numbers and identification is conducted by the laboratory on receipt of samples, and sample receipt advises issued to Newcrest.
Details of all sample movement are recorded in a database table. Dates, Hole ID sample ranges, and the analytical
suite requested are recorded with the dispatch of samples to analytical services. Any discrepancies logged at the receipt of samples into the analytical services are validated.
Audits or reviews
Due to the limited duration of the program, no external audits or reviews have been undertaken. Internal verification and audit of Newcrest exploration procedures and databases are periodically undertaken.
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results.