NML is due its interrim results now, last year it was the 28th of this month.

They are setting up a new site to explore/research/analyse and all the equipment to do this should be on site now, and drilling should start soon, all this extra news should be covered in the interims.

does anyone have any further positive views on this company ??

>legend290782

It was something to do with NML cash, but not to do with a certain person's wage.

IMHO, the company was attempting something which would have alarmed the shareholders on the BBs and forced the regulators to take a very close look at the company.

On top of that I've now received more intelligence which is equally disturbing. Although I would not pass this on through a BB, I would say that if you want to find out the truth for yourself, take a close hard look at the people employed by the business.

Anomalous1
what does that mean? Are you inferring that NML are not going to develop the kimberlites and are using the new money raised, for their alluvial operations?
People employed by the company???? I don't understand what you mean.How do I find out the truth?

Chairman and Non-executive Director - Senator David Johnston
Deputy Chairman and Non-executive Director - Datuk Fung-Chee Lim
Managing Director and CEO - John M Cross
Non-executive Director - Dato Azizi Yom Ahmad
Finance Director and Company Secretary - Shane Healy
Non-executive Director - Chong-Kiat Lim
Mine Management, Angola - Piet and Neils Badenhorst
Independent Geologist - Dr Michael Harold Smith, FIMM, C. Eng, from Scotland
Consultant Geologist - Bernard Neehoff, AUSIMM, Perth, Australia

Which one of these people is Anomalous1 attempting to defame now?

Don't know mjr and I don't care...he obviously has nothing better to do or an alternative agenda. It is not worth reading his posts. I am sure news will be out soon and then Anomaly will clear off to deramp another stock!

>Stockdog
Please do keep us updated if they do respond. My guess is that they will not.

It's very likely that the company was contacted by the FSA last year and dissuaded from making inappropriate communications by email or telephone. This was after one of their directors had been sending emails (and telephone calls) about the company to private shareholders. It was as a result of these communications that the whole 'barge' argument started. Not to mention the statement that the company was "going for it" from the moment the equipment was on the ground.

WendyD likes to gloss over this incident, but the person concerned, with virtually no experience in the mining industry, was making statements as a director (on behalf of the company), which were at best extremely misleading and at worst deceiving. In a short while, I'll dissect Wendy D's post for you and show you what she has casually missed. Important facts that a shareholder should be aware of.

As for me, I've invested in dozens of companies. A fair number of them are mining related or actual diamond producers. Some have made me a great deal of money - FDI being one. In all the time I have invested in them, I have known more than a few of them to get their estimates or their dates of completion wrong. However, when I have discovered a mining company that has deliberately lied to their shareholders, I have taken a special interest. This is where I devote a large amount of time to research and posting on BBs.

IN the case of Conroy, I found out that the management had misled the shareholders about the survey being done in 2004. I had been told that the survey was to be used to capture a JV. That the survey company SRK was to be drilling and that this extra drilling would help the company prepare for the feasibility studies. It was only shortly before the survey was released, that I found out there was no extra drilling. The survey did not say anything remarkably different from one taken 3 years before and the company was then dreadfully short of funds. In the meantime, the management were listed as having large salaries and expenses paid trips. They split off the diamond venture (Karelian), saying that it would list in August 2004. It never has. When I realised what the company was up to, I wrote about it on the BB. I accepted that I had been fooled and that I had made a loss. I did not go running to the FSA or LSE about it, but have since kept an eye on the company to see if they pull some of the same stunts again.

In the case of AFD, well, that's covered on the ADVFN BBs. Suffice to say that the company put out a series of RNS last year, including the "we will be a diamond producing company in 8 weeks" RNS of January 2004. These RNS's were extremely misleading. Even AFD's own Chairman regrets making them. But one has to ask why he made them in the first place. If one examines the share price and the issues made by the company, you can possibly see why. To top all this, a director with an impeccable record and one of only two geologists on the board resigned on a matter of honour, when the Chairman used his vote, in my view Ultra viries, to award himself 1,000 per day for working on AFD. Something that was unjustified. The Chairman elected his own son to the board to railroad through these resolutions. At the AGM last December, there was a serious disgreement between the directors over the handling of the company. I have been in contact with shareholders of the company and a complaint has been made to the AIM, FSA and the DTI. We are still awaiting the outcome of the regulators enquiries. But as you can see, I have been involved in this company's affairs, because the management misled the shareholders.

In the case of NML, it is crystal clear to me that the company is also misleading the shareholders about their abilities. Even WendyD has stated that the new management are 'incompetent'. As I dig deeper into the affairs of the company, I discover more that alarms me.

Despite what Wendy claims, I do not report companies to the FSA every week. I do have a relationship with the FSA born out of the Room Service Shorting Scandal. I am keen to see that Private Investors are protected from the rogues on the market. Be they market makers or companies that are abusing their position.

I am also keen to see that Investors are protected from derampers claiming 'insider news'. Your post 'As I dig deeper into the affairs of the company, I discover more that alarms me.' rather falls into that category, without any back-up information. It is an easy thing to say that there is bad news...derampers are alwayd doing that..and your whole tone is very much that of a deramper.

Anomalous1- how can you substantiate that NML have 'deliberately lied to their shareholders'?

takahe - 13 Jun'05 - 14:11 - 781 of 784
Anomalous1
what does that mean? Are you inferring that NML are not going to develop the kimberlites and are using the new money raised, for their alluvial operations?
People employed by the company???? I don't understand what you mean.How do I find out the truth?

NML raised 500k purportedly to explore the kimberlites on the C9 license. Word has it that they've put out adverts to recruit kimberlite geologists. That indicates that they are involved in, or intending to research the kimberlites. It doesn't prove that they will. The company has stated an intention to do so. But then companies can make any number of statements and whether they are fulfilled is another matter.

If you examine the company's finances, you will notice that they raised $1.1 million in a placing last year and agreed a convertible drawdown facility for $1.25 million. Back in November 2004, they said that they had enough finance to bring the company into production. They also told the investors at the meeting that this would be in February 2005 and that they would be able to extract 5,000 carats in 2 weeks after start. They indicated that during the final exploration period (Nov 2004 to Feb 2005), they would be using approx $150k per month and that in production, they would need +$400k per month. The company was obliged to access the drawdown in January 2005, according to the RNS:

http://www.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200501201023585961H.html

So we know that the company had at least $1.25 million at that time. They may have had more, but then it is highly unlikely that they would have activated the drawdown (which carried 6% interest after one year) until they actually needed the money. After all, the facility was agreed on 5 October 2004, so had they activated it back then, when it is known that they had $1.1 million at least (through the placing), then the interest would have been wasteful of company funds.

So starting in January with $1.25 million, we can see the following outgoing cashflow:

1. January (approx) $37.5k
2. February $150k
3. March $150k
4. April $400k
5. May $400k
6. June $400k

Add those together and you get $1.5375 million. So in theory, the company would have run out of working capital at the start of June.

So now you can see why they had a dilution at the start of the month. Even if they do spend some of the 500k on the kimberlite, I would say that it is highly reasonable to assume that a good proportion of the $950k it represents would be used as working capital for the alluvials.

The company stated that they would be cashflow neutral for year-ending 2005. The company year end is 30 June 2005. So they would need a significant quantity of diamonds to fulfill that promise. That would be price sentive news, yet there has been no announcement of this. I guess they might be saving this for the year end statement. Or maybe they can't make this announcement, because they have not collected sufficient diamonds to validate it.

There's no way that an ordinary private shareholder can check the company books, except to question the management at the AGM. It is very convenient for the NML management that the AGMs are held in Malaysia and Singapore, where the largest shareholders are located. It prevents the majority of the smaller shareholders from attending and asking inconvenient questions.

Anomalous1
I take it that you are not a shareholder?

It is surely only your opinion that they are not intending to develop the kimberlites. Leon Daniels has expressed an interest in looking at the kimberlites and he is a renowned kimberlite geologist.
With regard to a previous post of yours about the FD lieing about diamonds being only one metre down...apparently, there are diamonds only 1 or 2 metres down but they are not generally good quality ones, so he was not lying.

Anomalous,

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

takahe - 13 Jun'05 - 14:54 - 786 of 787
Anomalous1- how can you substantiate that NML have 'deliberately lied to their shareholders'?

Quite apart from the ill-informed statements by Shane Healey about them "Going for it" right from the start of getting the equipment on site, you only have to look through the Project Summary to see numerous contradictions.

I pointed out one on the ADVFN BB just yesterday. They couldn't even agree in the Summary when the rainy season started or how long it lasted. See for yourself:


And


At the shareholder's meeting in November 2004, the management told the investors that the company would have to delay the start (because of the weather) and that it would not now be October 2004 as they had been telling everyone, but now Febraury 2005. They said that they had enough funding and would not need to dilute anymore.

Now we know that they didn not start until it was announced in April 2005. Two months late. They might excuse this by saying that the weather held them back. But if this is the case, how do they expect to keep operating during the next rainy season? Even excusing the weather, they still said that they had enough funding and would not need to dilute further. Yet they DID dilute and twice. The first when they converted the Badenhorst's final cash payment and the second just recently.

Wendy has claimed (see 775 above) that the Badenhorst's accepted shares instead of cash as their final payment. But if you remember, the agreement was that the final payment would be made on 30 November 2004:

http://www.uk-wire.com/cgi-bin/articles/200408040700065934B.html

It is clear from the finances breakdown, that the company was incapable of making that payment for $630,000 and the other payment for the directors' fees from the working capital, without jeopardising the operation. To sweeten the deal, the company offered the Badenhorsts $195,300 extras worth of shares (at the agreed previously agreed price of $0.1) by coverting the $630k due at $0.76 per share. So anyone trying to claim that the Badenhorsts accepting the shares was a vote of confidence in the project is attempting to deceive you, or they don't know that they are misleading you. It has since been made clear that the Badenhorsts have sold or transferred a million shares. Presumably someone told them they could covert the extra shares into cash at much better than $.10 per share. After all, the share price only dropped in April. But back in December when they were issued, the SP was much higher.

So how else do I know that the management misled the shareholders? Well, if you go back to the whole 'death threat' episode, you will recall that there was an AFX about the meeting being moved. We had already asked the Police to attend in plain clothes, which they did. After the AFX had been released, I asked a reporter friend, who works for the Telegraph, to attend the meeting and speak with the directors. So that the story could be reported seriously and not sensationalised. The reporter cam back and wrote the piece for the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2004/11/05/cnmill05.xml

In the article it says:

The threats had been made in a series of anonymous contributions to a share tipping website on September 18.

New Millennium, which has interests in Angola and Greenland, raised $1.6m in a private placing at a 30pc discount to the share price last month. Company sources believe the threats were made because of a concern that New Millennium had discovered diamonds in river beds in north-east Angola but was withholding this information from the stock market.

You see, they told the reporter that the threats were made because the company was withholding information, yet the real reason was because the shareholder concerned (who posts on ADVFN) had lost a considerable amount of money and blamed the directors.

The BBC picked up the Telegraph story and originally repeated the accusation about the company withholding information. But after I asked them to check with the Police (because I was the person that reported the threats to the Police), the BBC re-wrote the story to say this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3986463.stm

"New Millennium Resources chief executive John M. Cross told BBC News that its author believed the company had divulged market-sensitive information to selected shareholders, allowing them to profit at the expense of other investors.

"It seems someone thought we were withholding information from general release, which was quite untrue," he said.

But the man who spotted the threat on an internet bulletin board and alerted the police told BBC News that he thought the threat had simply been sparked off by a heavy loss on a share deal."

So you can see, John Cross told the BBC the same as they told the Telegraph, yet the management were already aware that the person was making threats because they had mades losses. The company altered the story to suit them and issued a false excuse - the withholding of information.

Sure, a large number of the shareholders did think that the company was withholding information - most of important of all - the Mine Start. The Investors had been told by the directors that the mine start would happen in October. So by November, most of them were fuming and angry, thinking that the news was being held back. What was really being held back, was the fact that the company had deceived the shareholders and that the mine start would not now take place until February (as they claimed).

Time after time, this company has been making promises they have been unable to fulfill. You only have to see the original Project Summary for yourself to realise that they were supposed to have started in April 2004, not April 2005.

The company came to diamond mining rather late in the day. They were originally supposed to be mining Niobium and Tantalum in Greenland. The diamonds on the Sarfartoq license were a happy addition to the value. It seems to me that this was a company in search of a money making project. They happened upon the C9 River Lapi license after the Badenhorsts introduced them to it. Since then, there have been numerous management changes and frequent delays to the project. It appears to most that they lack the necessary experience in running a minex company, to be able to successfully pull off the project. Whether they can learn this on the job is a different matter. They certainly seem to be operating by trial and error - to the expense of the shareholders.

Anomalous,

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

Anomalous1
'It appears to most that they lack the necessary experience in running a minex company, to be able to successfully pull off the project. ' that is a rather subjective statement.MANA have been in mining for far longer than NML and have hardly moved in sp. They certainly miscalculated but that is not uncommon with minex companies. That does not imply deliberate deceit. In the 13 months since Healy and Cross came on board, they have a mine, producing diamonds, in Angola. Hardly a mean achievement. The Badenhorst Bros have not just picked up a few shovels from B&Q. They are experienced miners and know what is there.

Your story above about the 'death threat' business is incorrect.

Anomalous1,

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?


The current resources of Concession C9 can be discussed in terms of target areas.

Rio Lapi Garimpo

The Proved Area has been defined with dimensions 1,500 metres by 200 metres within which systematic sampling of:

Old pits;
Undisturbed ground,
Bedrock
has been undertaken.

Within the area, the median thickness of overburden is 0.75 metres, gravels 1.25 metres and up to 0.25 metres of bedrock was penetrated. Grades of diamonds recovered ranged from 0.30 carats per cubic metre in the old diggings to 0.90 carats per cubic metre in the undisturbed ground. The median grade for all the tests was 0.627 carats per cubic metre.

The volume of diamondiferous gravel available in this block is thus:

1,500 x 200 x 1.25 cubic metres
= 375,000 cubic metres.
With a median grade of 0.627 carats per cubic metre this represents a measured resource of 235,000 carats. Dr Smith believes this to be a low figure because of the garimpero prospecting method used. Collaborative work with Professor Morais indicates that the garimpero method recovers approximately 40% of the stones (albeit the larger ones). The true resource figure should be higher.

Assuming a new, engineered extraction process recovers 80% of the stones, the recoverable measured resource should be 188,100 carats.

Rio Lapi Targets

Other target areas are present in the Lapi Garimpo area. (Figure 4) Using the thickness, grade and recovery factors for the Lapi Garimpo, the following inferred resources (see below table) have been calculated.


Target Length (m) Width (m) Inferred Resource (carats)
A 1,200 700 564,480
B 1,900 800 1,021,440
C 1,200 500 403,200
D 900 1200 725,760
E 2,000 800 1,075,200
TOTAL 3,790,080

Rio Lapi Resource Summary


Other prospectivity is present in the Rio Lapi basin. This includes eluvial, terrace and inter alluvial relict deposits as well as proximal materials associated with kimberlites that the author believes may be present in the basin.

Rio Chicapa Prospects

The valley of the Rio Chicapa is also highly prospective for diamonds. These include:

Point Bar Deposits - downstream of the confluence of the Lapi and the Chicapa is a point bar meander complex. This is a prime exploration target. Grab sampling indicates grades comparable with the Lapi Garimpo. The volume of sediment is approximately 4 million cubic metres and with a grade of 0.6 carats per cubic metre and 80% recovery, this represents an inferred resource of 1,920,000 carats. There is at least one other point bar complex on the licence and they are best suited to exploitation using river cut off and dredging.
Alluvial Flats near Base Camp - across the Rio Chicapa from the base camp is an extensive alluvial flat. Grab sampling at surface has yielded grades of 0.20 to 0.30 carats per cubic metre. This is believed to be low because the source of this sand and gravel is the area of the Catoca kimberlite field and grades are likely to increase with depth. Exploration work is required. The deposit contains approximately 12 million cubic metres of sand and gravel. Assuming a low grade of 0.30 carats per cubic metre and 80% recovery, this represents an inferred resource of 2,880,000 carats.
Rio Chicapa Channel and Rapids - no data is forthcoming on this prospecting play. Typical dredge grades for the riverbed are 0.20 to 0.25 carats per cubic metre while in the adjacent areas downstream; grades of up to 2.3 carats per cubic metre have been encountered upstream from rapids.
Rio Luo Prospects

The Rio Luo runs through the eastern part of the licence and drains 40% of its area. No formal work has been done on the Rio Luo but it does yield diamonds to artisanal diggers. This part of the licence is underLain by the classic Calonda succession with relict Kalahari sediments. There is major upside prospectivity for diamonds in this area but work is required.



The Rio Lapi Garimpo has been subject to most investigation and provides the basis for assessment of the Rio Lapi targets. The area has been evaluated by means of hand-dug trial pits and the gravels obtained washed by hand or by using a small separation plant located at the Mombo LDA base camp.

Economic Model of the Rio Lapi Garimpo

An economic model for the Rio Lapi Garimpo Proven Reserve can be based on the test work to date supported by:

Technical information provided by Mombo LDA.
Evaluation of mining methods and the leasing to equipment to undertake land clearing, overburden stripping, ore mining and rehabilitation.
Evaluation of the project.
An assumption that the proven reserves evaluated in the Rio Lapi Garimpo will be replaced from the Rio Lapi targets.
The project financial model is detailed within this report. Initial production of diamonds will be annualised at 120,000 carats increasing to 240,000 carats five (5) months after operations commence, yielding a profit of US$ 110 per carat rising to US$124 per carat with the increased production. The recoverable reserve of 188,100 carats of diamonds identified in the Rio Lapi Garimpo should thus yield approximately US$ 20 million.

Potential Economic Upside of Indicated and Inferred Resources

The Rio Lapi Garimpo reserves have been investigated in detail and are considered proven. Upside value is derived from Rio Lapi Targets A - E (see above descriptions) with an Inferred Resource of 3,790,080 carats. These will be mined during a period of increased production and will therefore yield the higher profit of US$124 per carat (see above).

If this profitability level were maintained, the above indicated resource would yield a pre tax profit in excess of US$ 500 million. It is reasonable to assume that the exploration and exploitation of the inferred reserves carries some commercial and technical risk and the above resource end value will not be achieved. However, based on the history, local knowledge and the geology of the area, there is a reasonable expectation of at least 40% success and an expected value of US$ 200 million.

Rio Chicapa - Point Bar Deposits

Inferred Resource 1,920,000 carats.
Assuming a profit margin of US$ 124 per carat this has an indicated value of US$ 240 million or US$ 47 million allowing for a 20% probability of success.
Rio Chicapa - Alluvial Flats near Base Camp

Inferred Resource 2,880,000 carats.
A conservative estimate guess of the profit per carat is US$ 65.00. The resulting estimated value of the resource is US$ 187 million. Allowing for a 20% probability of commercial success this represents an expected value of US$ 37 million.
Rio Chicapa Channel and Rapids, Terraces, Eluvial Deposits, Kalahari Relicts and Rio Luo

not assessed but they represent a considerable upside value.
Potential Deposit Expected Profit
(US$ Million) Probability of Success
Rio Lapi Garimpo 20.00 1.00
Rio Lapi targets 200.00 0.40
Rio Chicapa - Point Bars 47.00 0.20
Rio Chicapa - Alluvial Flats 37.00 0.20
TOTAL 304.00

Summary of Potential Valuations

2004 New Millennium Resources Limited
Disclaimer

The company has stated that, once in full production, they expect to extract 10,000 cts/month leading to a profit of around $1M/month of which around $500k is attributable to NML.

Why would it be price sensitive news if they were producing enough diamonds to break-even, when they stated they expect to make $500k PROFIT?

Looks like Anomalous strikes again with the wig and cloak routine...LOL...!!

takahe - 13 Jun'05 - 15:16 - 789 of 791
It is surely only your opinion that they are not intending to develop the kimberlites. Leon Daniels has expressed an interest in looking at the kimberlites and he is a renowned kimberlite geologist.
With regard to a previous post of yours about the FD lieing about diamonds being only one metre down...apparently, there are diamonds only 1 or 2 metres down but they are not generally good quality ones, so he was not lying.

It is my opinion that they are looking at the kimberlites, but they lack the necessary funds to develop them. It was thought that the revenue for the alluvials would be enough to help pay for the initial research and that a JV with a major, such as BHP or De Beers would enable NML to take the Kimberlites through to BFS and then production.

The company has said that the kimberlites were being explored by third parties (unknown). It is safe to assume that these people were doing so with the agreement and knowledge of NML. Just recently, several events happened which may have caused NML to change their plans.

1. Alrosa indicated that they were looking to considerably expand the Catoca operation.

2. That De Beers were back in Angola and with an agreement from the Angolan Government. DB were the original licensees. As they are actively looking to find new and rich sources of rough diamonds, it would be natural for them to revisit the sites they've already explored and possibly acquire the licenses.

As we don't know who was looking at the kimberlites, we can't tell for sure why NML suddenly put in the application for the kimberlite licenses. It appeared from the Project Summary that they already had the rights to the kimberlites. So it makes one suppose, that NML acted now, because they were prompted to by the interest of others.

However, even if the 'others' hadn't started looking at the C9 kimberlites, you have to admit that it makes a fantastic excuse to raise funds from the market. For whatever purpose the company eventually uses them for!


I speak to Leon every now and then. He told me about the request to look at the kimberlites. So far, nothing has come of it. I'm not sure that Leon would have the time to do the visits anyway. He does have rather a lot on his plate with Tawana and other matters.


With regard to the "one metre down" statement, you can see the extent of the over-burden in this picture:



It looks more than a metre, possibly even 2 metres down, however, it was when he said that you "could dig down 1 metre and there were handfulls of them, big ones" that it was obvious that this was a gross exaggeration. You only have to look at the grade to realise that 0.627 carats per m3 is not "handfulls" as he said. 0.627 cpm3 = 25 cpht

Anomalous1
'The company has said that the kimberlites were being explored by third parties (unknown). ' they are not actually unknown. They are being tactful here, because it is all rather political.
As regards the diamonds, the better stones are known to be deeper down. I hardly think they are digging these holes for fun. These men are mining engineers.
You seem, by the tone of your posts, to be unwilling to believe anything good and to 'spin' information in a negative way.
I don't intend to read your prolific and vituperative posts any more.

one last thing...Leon vounteered to look at the kimberlites...wrong spin again.