Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

Ucore Rare Metals Inc. V.UCU

Alternate Symbol(s):  UURAF

Ucore is focused on rare and critical-metal resources, extraction, beneficiation, and separation technologies with the potential for production, growth, and scalability. Ucore's vision and plan is to become a leading advanced technology company, providing best-in-class metal separation products and services to the mining and mineral extraction industry.


TSXV:UCU - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by CanadaCoinon Feb 09, 2020 12:27pm
86 Views
Post# 30664184

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Update from Mark

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Update from MarkPrefeasibility Studies [PFS] are not all that common any more, and not necessisarly required for most projects. Only if a company feels that their project is not quite ready for the more costly and time consuming FS, then they would enter into a PFS. 

"And does that mean that the FS will be based on the ressource estimate pre 2013 without more drillings?"

A technical resource report is independent of a feasibility study. If a company is not planning on revising their resource estimate for any upcoming study, then they will use their latest in the study. 


Moulouk wrote: CanadaCoin:

maybe it was answered in other posts, but can you tell me why there is no PFS? All issuers can skip it?

And does that mean that the FS will be based on the ressource estimate pre 2013 without more drillings?

thanks, Moulouk

CanadaCoin wrote:
steamerlane wrote: The problem I see with UCORE is they are always making statements about what they are going to do,which as far as I can tell started in 2014.Then there is the PEA,which was done in 2013,it is flawed and UCORE knows it,that's why they are going to do it again.Once the new one is completed,all the previous numbers will change(I thnik they hope that with the addition of more metals it will help offset anything negative) and I'm sorry to say,to the negative.I have good reason to believe this because other competitors has pointed this out,not with bias numbers and words,but with factual numbers using UCORE's own statements.So this is part of the reason I have changed my view of UCORE and everyone should take a closer look at this company's presentations and decide for themselves how UCORE compares to the competition.


The 2013 is not flawed, but understand that a Preliminary Economic Assessment is indeed 'preliminary'. It was based on a SX Flowsheet, but never meant to attract 'final' financing or initiate the construction of a mine and/or a refinery. Then came along the MRT opportunity in 2015 and the 2013 PEA quckly became irrelevant or obsolete. 

And note that Ucore is not currently proceeding with a new PEA, but a Feasbility Study [FS] that was suppose to be done back in 2015/6, but never materialized. And perhaps that is best, for that FS would have been based on a MRT Flowsheet and cannot be moved forward at this present time for obvious reasons. And even if they did complete a MRT FS back in 2016, they would then have to revise it today to reflect the change back to a SX Flowsheet.

But you are right, all the economic data from the 2013 PEA is now obsolete.....due to age and/or fundamental changes. Data, such as CAPEX, OPEX, NPV, IRR, etc. 

There is nothing wrong with Ucore moving from SX to the MRT technology back in 2015, but it does cause problems today with the MRT locked up in court. Such as.....how long will the court case drag out? Do we move forward without MRT? The DOD wants SX! We don't have a SX solution, for we abandoned it back in 2015! If we win back the MRT, what to do with the DOD? Do we move the Bokan forward with MRT...independent of the DOD? 

It's an aweful situaton to be in. Sure, Ucore is calling the future MRT court win with a 'hybird' solution, but once again, this then means yet another 'start over' economic study and wait another two years....and more money. It's vicious circle Ucore and their shareholders find themselves in. 




Bullboard Posts