I have just had a talk with the company secretary (Anthony...

I have just had a talk with the company secretary (Anthony Begovich - AB), to discuss aspects of issues raised in this thread before composing this reply.

Where has all the money gone?


This is a rough compilation from quarterlies. It shows:

• Resource as of Mar 2015 which has not changed significantly since then. Some geotech and mett drilling has taken place but nothing significant has been added or deleted. The resource will change as Cu Co metal prices vary but probably not that much.
• Some $12.4M spent on exploration. On a broad basis this has been spent:
• To date some capex for the possible mine development has been included under exploration/evaluaton (AB) but not easy to quantify (Say some $4-5M for roads, fences, extended DFS etc). Some expenditures help exploration logistics. In the future these expenditures will be split out into a separate "Development" category or another name (AB)
• AEM survey, trenching, soil geochem and other exploration probably account for another $1-2M
• leaving around ?$aud6M for drilling related costs.

Drilling hasn't been as successful as hoped for (AB) but as Africadale points out Monwezi 7 has some potential to be a satellite deposit. Mon 7 and Kambundji have been advanced a step up the line towards possible deposits. Kasangasi has seen a lot of dust so far but there is a revised geological interpretation that can be tested in due course.
So of 5 drilled targets only 1 (Katete) is a true duster.
From an exploration perspective IMO that is a reasonable to good outcome given statistics of how few showings that advance to prospect level which is IMO where NZC are at for Mon 2 and perhaps Mon 7 and Kambundji.
The next stage is deposit with an inferred Jorc resource which further drilling at Mon 2 will show one way or the other.


Also look at land holding and clearly its just bits and drabs all over the place.

The unusual shape of the FTB JV is the result of carefully considered reductions forced on IVN by Mining/Tenement laws from their initial very large blocks.
THE SHAPES ARE NOT RANDOM but are what was considered to be the best ground that could be kept at the time within the rules.

The comparison of what was good at the time has to be taken in the context that it was the beginning of exploration and discovery at Kamoa. Minnows like Kalongwe and whatever potential the FTB ground had was eventually allowed to pass to RER/NZC. Whatever the reason IVN chose to do this IMO it has been a game changer for NZC.

These reduction rules are ongoing (AB) and along with JV time constrained expenditure commitments mean NZC has to balance the rate and amount of spending on these tenements.

Terms of the JV (below) are probably the same with only date changes follow re-negotiations following the 2016 corporate restructure of RER/NZC.

NZC announced it had reached the first stage payment of $US3M in the March 2018 quarterly.


Mineralised posted awhile back that there has been a moratorium? on staking within this area. From that perspective NZC may be lucky to have this ground to actually explore because no-one else gets a look for some time.

This image for Kalongwe SE shows how complex, and relatively small (Kalongwe) Billion++ dollar (IN GROUND VALUE) targets can be.



The FTB JV contiguous irregular claims have many kilometers of such ground with some still to be tested prospects already known. Useless work?

NZC is raising money now so that they can continue this required and staged exploration of the FTB JV AND take Kalongwe to the mining stage.

At the moment as far as AB knows (or can/will say) mining will be Phase 1 DMS followed several years later by SX-EW.
More aggressive options (early SX-EW) may not be off the table entirely but very much less likely - power (an issue but not insurmountable for a short term (generators/ship ore to Kolwezi?/IVN power sharing etc)), longer lead in time to production and resultant cash flow (another issue), higher capex (for NZC a biggie)......



EPILOGUE
I am particularly interested to see what happens at Kambundji and Mamba from what I have seen and read so far.

The April presentation for Kambundji looks like there may be a typo - hope so.


Finale
1gun I was tempted to report the post I replied to for baiting, and/or unsubstantiated information. IMO the post of yours comes pretty close to both but this is HC and few appear willing to try or feel the need support opinions/viewpoints in detail as you did with the perceived poor drilling results to date. Mine tends to be from a long term exploration geos perspective of being half full which though not necessarily good has kept me going for quite a few decades.

Coda
If you haven't already done so call the company and speak to Mark or Adam if they are available. Neither were in today but they have been friendly and helpful to me in the past.