RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Will TKO Be A Better Play Than IVN In 2024...?LOL. Reading is not your strong point. My first paragraph states the very low head grade in BC and thus the rest of the paragraph is the same asset. Cash costs are not extemely low, they are 2.20-2.30 vs IVN's ( 1.40 and rapidly falling with a smelter coming online and larger volumes). Your costs are exposed to Canada's quickily ramping up Carbon taxes. Its a low margin asset with no growth prospects and if you actually read the financials.
If you think they are going to be able to build out the facilities in Arizona and be producing in '25 you are clinically insane. You clearly have no background in mining or any understanding of what infrastructure is involved ( insitu or otherwise). Stop reading TKO's promo pieces and assuming they are facts....they aren't. They haven't even fully financed the build out yet.
Speaking of finances, TKO's balalnce sheet is a bloated pig given the assets it covers. You are holding 600m in net debt, and that number needs to grow given the financial obligations. There is a substancial equity issue required here, and this can't be the first time you've heard that.
I'm not saying TKO is a terrible company. It's got potential for a junior/speculative miner, but given its execution risk, balance sheet, and limited prospects of its only operating asset, you are displaying your limited understanding of mining and risk to think investments in TKO and IVN are interchangeable. I would recommend you educate yourself a little more outside of TKO's PR releases and chat boards.