RuudinFrance wrote: SnowyWindows wrote: I felt like throwing the numbers into a workbook because people, definitely including myself, like the throw a bunch of numbers to the wind without anything real to back it up. These calculations are extremely rough/estimated. I know that there is probably a few things that need some fixing...
But I'm seeing that NLC can double their NPV by adding an extra 25,000 tonnes / year of lithium carbonate production and removing the need for the extra reagents/additives.
Google Sheet Document
Thanks Snowy, this is a much appreciated excersize.
And yes, there are a few things that might need some fixing :-)
How about remaking the sheet into some kind of "what if" analysis? with following variables for starters:
1 Pproduction volume (suggested by company)
2 OPEX [might be lower (6 molecules of water in the calciumchloride precipitation + better evaporation than expected (PEA), as reported by company)]
3 The discount figure may be fiddled around with (by optimists like myself)
4 Maybe also turn revenue/ton into a variable (we know we're low in the PEA).
In that case, we'll have a tool for both bears and bulls and realists :-)
There have been discussions with possible partners and there are offers on the table.
Problem is, that management have found these offers wanting (and rightly so. They remember the LAC disaster).
We've got money and we've got (some) time.
We don't have much time as management wants/needs to continue this "fast track" they're on.
There are reasons, as explained by the company, for executing the PFS first. Just maybe, this (possibly also) delaying tactic will put more pressure on future partners.
Q3 is such a gem that it is a very risky business for prospective partners to try to get their ultimate price. They should possibly better look at getting the supply agreed on and only then look at "will we get 80% return, 50% return or no return at all".
The giga factories that "soon" will need continuous supply will be looking around also. As your post concerning India indicates, even countries are looking for sustainable supply and NLC is a, as yet uncommitted and independent, long term suplier.
Plain financial greed may very well become an unexpected (read stupid) failure to some prospective "partners".
The basis for any partner should not be the present valuation of the company, but the future earnings and more important, a guaranteed supply.
Please change the sheet into a "what if" and while doing this,
have fun.