Post by
Ciseaux on Jun 30, 2020 10:53pm
What is the total cost to undo the capital structure?
Pallinghurst said that the deal did not go through last Fall because they did not like the capital structure. If this is now fixed, could they bid the same as last year, minus the cost incurred to undo the capital structure?
What is the total cost to undo the capital structure?
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 3:54am
Doubtful, last year deal is dead, all new offer
Comment by
mick1888 on Jul 01, 2020 8:33am
There was never a night or a problem that could defeat sunrise or Hope.... ;-) Got Lithium CalAB... ;-) GLTA longs
Comment by
Calgary_AB on Jul 01, 2020 8:41am
it's one thing to have hope it's another to think NMX is a gold mine... No, I don't have LI just Gold and silver for now
Comment by
mick1888 on Jul 01, 2020 8:47am
CalAB, I like that 'for now' bit....;-) F#c the climate argument when it comes to money, man of principle I see.... ;-)
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 12:13pm
What Pallinghurst (and a lot of others) didn't like is the way the debt was structured (the restrictions were way too tight and posed a serious risk, as we have seen). The rate was high too, but people tend to forget that the original idea was to get into production and start paying back as soon as possible. Then came the cost overruns ...
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 3:23pm
You make great points, Mick. Engineering plans cost out all elements in advance and should not be off by too much. That is why the fees are high (the work involved and professional responsibility) and a contingency fund is in place (since there is always some variance). The existing building was easy to evaluate, so what was the problem??
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 3:32pm
Between 2016 and 2019 project cost multiply by 2.6, problem ? they put lipstick on a pig to raise cash at overpriced company value.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 3:36pm
To be fair, the scope of the project changed significantly.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 3:42pm
Between 2016 and 2019, really ??????? Just slight increase of production from 30kt to 37kt not great change, same mine, same processes, nothing material.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 3:59pm
We would have to look at the exact timing of events to be sure, but the plan was more ambitious after 2015. You are right that the budget jumped, but part of this was better insight on what it really would cost.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 4:09pm
Look at 2016 techncial study, more or less same project but 2.6 times less expensive, difficult to explain ... whabouchi is a mine process, spodumene concentrator not new technology, electrochemical process the same ... very very fishy.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 4:37pm
TTT, for me the bigger concern is spending beyond the plans. At least we knew that the plan budgets were higher and could adjust expectations accordingly.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 5:05pm
Right, as investors were aware of cost bump between 2016 and before 300M overcost PR ... was their duty to check. Main problem is with overcost/delay, acrobatic financing suddenly transform as a house of cards.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 5:08pm
relisten that also, last great boubou interview before been push out, LACC ? not a problem everything fine, no worry sleep well https://cdn.cogecolive.com/prod-20200130/guy_1580387493990321.mp3?fbclid=IwAR266gCjU29-C6EnOUQeXKLIMAFUKC3EmttP4IAjmR-WUrRvgq6sM_kJOIY
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 5:19pm
Nobody listened to advice in 2019 that $10-20 million should have been paid to the bond trustee to make the problem go away and allow completion of the Pallinghurst deal ($30 million was eventually paid at the end of January 2020).
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 5:22pm
Problem great boubou overconfident guy and maybe expect Nordic will be scared by McCarthy, but don't mess up with Vikings !
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 5:26pm
Yes! As amazing as it may seem, the whole mess we are in today COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED in late 2019 if common sense had prevailed. The risks were too great to "stand on principles"!
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 5:28pm
And pretty convinced IQ will have jump in to help replace bonds with low interest loan.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 5:32pm
This actually makes sense. IQ's mandate is to advance the interests of Quebecers. The project is a long-term investment in assets located in Quebec, where it will (eventually) pay taxes, employ Quebecers, and contribute to government "green economy" plans.
Comment by
Calgary_AB on Jul 01, 2020 8:46pm
and you Anon helped them pump like crazy...did you forget?
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 5:42pm
Mick, the spending is difficult to understand. I have not seen a good explanation.
Comment by
phantom666 on Jul 02, 2020 3:49am
The decision to focus on Lithium Hydroxide was in the NR July 31 2019
Comment by
mick1888 on Jul 02, 2020 4:36am
If July 2019, as you state below, that was approx six months after the overrun was announced.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 02, 2020 6:43am
Wrong change almost nothing, they stop producing lithium carbonate and produce only lithium hydroxide but in NMX process lithium carbonate is produce from hydroxide, no change to electrochemical plant (most costly), contrarly avoid to build the hydroxide to carbonate unit, even if less costly than electrochemical unit (metathesis) should induce a cost reduction.
Comment by
phantom666 on Jul 02, 2020 3:26pm
Wrong Triple T, first U produce carbonate then convert it to hydroxide. Key advantages of Lithium Hydroxide Battery Cathodes vs. Other Chemical Compounds include better power density (more battery capacity), longer life cycle and enhanced safety features.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 02, 2020 4:03pm
"Tic Tac To" the great wizard incanted, and "P O O F", the cauldron filled with lithium carbonate...
Comment by
Calgary_AB on Jul 01, 2020 7:58pm
now all of you are smart, especially takeaction joker....at the time you guys bashed me for saying "it was bad" you all said it's normal to cost over run...
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 2:57pm
Rarely see a new complex chemical process in an old building, normally building is design around process and would have been more cheaper. But purchasing shawinigan was helping to make a balloon to raise capital at overprice.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 3:24pm
Very expensive to take a reinforced concrete building and site and make big changes, but the acquisition cost was a deal, and the location is fantastic.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 3:32pm
yes you can fish during lunch ;-)
Comment by
Ciseaux on Jul 01, 2020 3:03pm
Pallinghurst knew of the cost overrun last Fall when they proposed to come in at 25 cents per share. And the debt is now fixed. My point is that they could make the same bid, minus the cost to fix the capital structure.
Comment by
Takeactionnow on Jul 01, 2020 3:34pm
What changed was lithium pricing (down), but high purity lithium salts have not been as adversely affected. The battery industry outlook two-three years out is very good, making the project an attractive one for strategic investors. This is particularly so in light of strategic minerals/supply chain issues, and the whole relationship with major supplier China question.
Comment by
TicTacTo on Jul 01, 2020 3:08pm
only problem as in LACC past offer is dead, no leverage by management to impose rules of game.
Comment by
Calgary_AB on Jul 01, 2020 7:55pm
They knew about cost over run but they didn't know about all the stupid deals and promisses signed yet, they needed to do more DD After they found out all the things GB and his team made, they decided not to invest... Investers are interested in LI, GB presold it all and issued almost a billion shares, so what is left for any investor to make?