Post by
Wangotango67 on Jan 24, 2024 11:22pm
THOUGHTS -
Shareholder Vantage
- No iron credit
- said would work on pulling plats out ( 2016 )
- no magnesium oxide credit ( pax )
- promised to include rhodium
- promised to include several exotics
- permitting ( 2016 )
- mining ( 2016 )
- far more tonnage ( lots axed )
- other minerals in deposit
Disadvantage
- found sweet spot but said extraction improvements in 2023 pfs
- 1% recovery improvement = $111 million ( if 50% rec = $5.5 b - $2.35 b capex / opex )
- CO2 checkmated magnesium credit
- 6 concentrates
- zone boundary changes
- extraction can't handle silicates / crystalines / ss
- junior is content with extraction
- US interest with sizable percentage
- shares racked up since 2015 / 2016 ( dilution )
- share price slide ( metal prices or way deposit was developed )
- 5 - 100% owners ( 2018 financials )
- Stakeholder Modelled ( Gov't + FN + other stakeholders )
- Pitiful PFS
RESOLVE ?
Pull forward pfs ( revise it )
HOW ?
Model it with - Nickel Matte ( instant nickel payable correction )
Include 30% Gov't rebate like CNC
1% recovery = $111 million ( eng formula 2023 pfs )
Then, 50% recovery ( which we def have ) should be minimum
$ 5.5 billion - $ 2.35 billion ( opex / capex )
= $ 3.15 billion
Promised plats pulled
7 million PGM oz's ( more if 846 mil t inferred kept )
50% recovery ( est )
= 3.5 million PGM oz - melt value
= $ 3.15 billion
Iron Credit 14% ( in peridotites ) 3 geo group )
Create separate iron credit
Yet - 6 concentrates cleverly consumes all irons y
YET - if only one bulk concentrate / left over iron
Say.... 5% ( low balling )
467 mil tonnes x 5%
= 23,350,000
x $125 / t hematite
= $ 2,918,750,000 billion
467 mil tonnes x 5%
= 23,350,000
x $250 t / magnetite ( factor furnance to convert hematite to magnetite )
= $ 5,837,500,000 billion
Magnesium can be sold as
oxide = $ 450 / t
nano = $1,350 / t
mtal = $3,500 -----> up way more
My former post mentioned $20 / t assigned to shareholders
Yet... in order to achieve $20 / t profit / payout
PFS would need to see 5x that value $ 100 / t to see a buyer pay $20 / t
If PFS is not revised then,
Current pfs has been modelled to keep valuation low
never fulfill promises of, plats, exotics,
keep a 6 concentrate never factor a magnesium credit oxide
consume all iron in several concentrates versus 1 bulk
lots of silicate ores converted to waste vs was once considered ore
stick to sulphide extraction vs diff extraction justifies pfs
yet.... well i'll refrain = sh / ace card.
Shovel ready next yeay with a pfs like that ?
= they truly thought of shareholders - or - selves and stakeholders ?
If they flipped the model to produce matte would it be fair to shareholders
who waited, suffered over the years - no.
All because cheapies were collected to hoard % ownership.
Therefore,
revising pfs ( now ) would be far better for shareholders.
They'll most likely produce a matte but sell wellgreen on the cheap prior.
Those are my thoughts...