RE:RE:Not derisked, not by a long shotClownTown wrote: wrong. another clown that can't read a financial statement. they have 13+ million in the bank that covers all their operations, ea, permits etc all the way up to construction. once they get to building phase, then they will need cash which will not come from pp but from a bank, you know? the whole purpose of a BFS? its called a BANKABLE feasibility study for a reason.
management is paid by performance shares, they have no base salary. you think they're going to dilute themselves? laughable
this project is derisked on all major obstacles
To say "derisked" is total rubbish. Read the FS which highlights things that could go wrong, however obscure. If we were derisked we'd be at $4 plus and not where we are. There is currently no environmental approval (or even an application made yet), no construction permit, no construction provider appointed, no power supply agreement, and no off-take or other financing agreement. A problem with any of these could put 12 months on the timeline.
One thing is sure is that the build certainly won't all be financed by bank borrowing, that's not how it works.
If you believe these goals will all be achieved then stay invested. If not then either sell and move on or sell and look to get back in next year.
I agree though plenty of positives to keep the faithful on board. I wanted this sold before now and take profit but I am prepared to hold only because Rick LaBelle is on board and because I do think he will get this built.