BCSC chimes in ... ... and I'm sure it's a result of complaints filed by the likes of certain posters post PFS ... regardless ... it is what it is.
After taking a breath ... it's clear that the CPM numbers remain reasoned forecast ... just not applicable in the eyes of the BCSC because forecasts are not guarantees. The trailing averages are obviously accurate ... thus ... the only case that can be relied upon in their eyes is that one.
We have already seen these numbers ... there is no surprise to them ... they haven't changed ... investors just have to weigh whether they want to rely on the CPM forecasts or take the BSCS rationale as final ... let's be clear ... we were already relying on CPM numbers because the trailing average case was included by TetraTech ... we all were aware.
If you believe that this changes the asset value even lower ... which today is only valued by the market at about 9-10 million ... then I guess you might be dumping on open of trading.
I am willing to bet they could sell this project tomorrow for 30 million - 40 million ... 30 cents ... 40 cents a share buyout for the whole company quite easily.
Taylor says sell ... so what ... his cohort already gave us their collective thought awhile ago and I do say their collective thought ... this guy is simply giving recent airplay to it for his note.
As for who is to blame ... TetraTech put out the PFS ... they compiled the economic modelling ... they were the ones who should have known whether CPM forecasts were useable in the eyes of the regulators ... so if anyone dropped the ball ... it was TetraTech.
I think this has made the company an easier target to take out cheap ... but by cheap ... it would still get much more than 9 cents a share. Somebody could simply pick up the project ... sit on it until the MN prices are useable for the regulators ... then move it forward ... or ... take it private and move forward regardless.
Hard to say what the ramifications are on moving to BFS now ... changing the base case to the trailing has disqualified it from meeting CIM standards for reserves ... so would it take the prices meeting the CPM numbers for a 3 year average to actually meet the CIM standard ???
The company definitely needs to put out some guidance on what the next steps for the company are with regards to the impact of this regulator dictated alteration to the PFS ... which in my view really doesn't change anything.
Sell it for 30 million ... 40 million ???
Continue to push ahead on battery side ... with a partner?
Really need some guidance from the company at this point.
As for my postulations over the weekend ... clearly todays event wasn't one of them ... I own it ... however ... I do believe there is some positive event yet to unfold along the lines I was postulating.
This was a wierd unfolding of a BCSC concern ... one that caught the company off guard by the looks of it ... but remedied easily enough.
As part of the guidance we should receive ... it would make sense that it include what kind of savings in the EMM CAPEX/OPEX could potentially bring the trailing numbers into an economic realm ... that in itself would be a boost enough to bring huge focus back on the CPM forecasts.
All is not lost here ... not a matter of a hope and prayer ... just pragmatic analysis ... and a bit of guidance.