RE:RE:Time to bring in a partnergeneral360 wrote:
not sure if the financing is a problem. i'm kinda confused, i guess i need to go back and re-read the FS and see what they were indicating the schedule was back then, a year ago. we now know schedule and scope.
i see this new schedule is apparently 5% sooner as per the news. but yet we're saying we'll be producing 2 years later? the devil is in these details!
if we're not breaking ground until spring Apr of next year - which i believe was always the target? - then i'm not sure about being late? and if we're not starting w/ construction until then, then we don't need 100-200 million until then, so is our financing "delayed"? not wise to take out a big LOAN now and be paying interest if we don't need the money for about 6-9 months from now?
I do want to see the details from the NR about the "securing long-lead critical equipment and major components, sourcing offtake partnerships and agreements, "
long-lead equip - if the orders are in, this sounds promising as in there might already be financing in place, or a long term financing / waiting on the overall financing picture.
the sourcing offtake partnerships - this is some of the "SHOW ME THE MONEY". how big, how predictable, and when will this start!? thought we're talking about selling product within MONTHS of breaking ground?
company has gone SILENT...what's the plan stan? the money guy is gone and we haven't acknowledged that have we MR SALT?!
sounds like we drift lower for a couple more months? the market is NOT excited about this now! looks like it'll take the money answer to get excited about this...
I think you are right. There is enough in the PR to read the positives between the lines.
My take here is that to borrow long term money at attractive rates from pension funds and longer term financiers you have to tick every single box. Reports need to be supported by secondary reports to confirm the first report. All EA conditions have to be met and access rights defined with a fully costed construction pathway as well as defining production capability, access to markets and logistics all fully priced with MOU's in place and the cost of every nut and bolt accounted for.
Anyone with experience of business would know that in seeking to finance a totally new mine for a company with no prior mining experience is tough. Sure, take on a partner but that's unlikely to speed up the process to production. All it does is heavily dilute existing shareholders rather than take the tougher but preferred choice of going alone and using borrowing.
At the point two years ago when there were no takers for GA this was a basket case. Existing management were totally out of their depth with no idea how to take this forward. To give credit the two things they did do right was raise $10m at $2 and appoint a respected no nonsense guy within the industry who then put together a capable team. Forget that it's dropped from $1.50 to 59c since his appointment. Look at what's happened to other non producing juniors in the same time frame.
Without Rick's appointment Atlas would have had no direction and been sold for peanuts. Now we are on a road to production we have to be patient, either to get to production or more likely for for a buyer before then who sees the potential of GA with much of the pre construction work in place together with the bonus of a large stake in TPR.
We all knew when they announced they would work towards production it would be a long term hold. Bleating now that the share price is depressed because there are no material announcements and things are taking too long shows no understanding of what is really involved in getting a resource out of the ground and to market.