London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Agreed @obs, that makes sense. I get the same BRL-USD rate as you (i.e. 3.6) by taking the DIP numbers in BRL from the Cashflow table and dividing them by the USD values from the document.
Any project valuations should surely use current/projected FX rates as well as iron ore prices -- unless of course there are rates and prices that have been locked into agreements (e.g. the DEV JV agreement that we have not seen). Not sure how and where to allow for any such locks but I'll consider it as I work through the numbers.
@Tradecraft. I too couldn't find an explicit reference to an exchange rate, but from the tables at the back you can deduce one from the revenues and DIP's stated in BRL, which we also know in USD. I'll take a look.
I’ll take 50p.
Hello @obs
Progress is slow I'm afraid, I have zero time to spend on this during the week and only limited time at weekends.
I did start transcribing the balance sheet from the PRJ yesterday, but there are quite a few numbers that are difficult to decipher. The cashflow sheet is even less legible. I've requested clean copies from KDNC directly.
On 24 Jan you wrote: "You'll probably be aware that by using a USD to BRL of 5.47 rather than that used in the JRP of 3.6 on the second page you've implicitly reduced the sale price of the ore from $61/t to $40/t. (61 * 5.47 / 3.6)". I don't see that rate explicitly mentioned in the document, on page 2 or elsewhere. Can you give me a specific paragraph reference please?
How are you getting on with your spreadsheets @Tradecraft?
I see the lower quality iron ore prices have come off the boil a little recently, but the higher quality and pellets premium are holding up well!
http://www.custeel.com/en/csi.jsp
===[
Date Seaborne index 62% Fe fines Seaborne index 65% Fe fines Seaborne index 65% Fe pellets premium
2021-01-29 157.90 183.20 52.80
2021-01-28 156.20 181.70 52.80
2021-01-27 165.50 190.00 51.30
2021-01-26 164.70 189.50 51.30
2021-01-25 168.50 192.70 51.30
2021-01-22 168.70 193.50 51.30
2021-01-21 170.40 194.50 51.30
2021-01-20 168.80 194.00 46.30
2021-01-19 170.40 192.50 46.30
2021-01-18 173.40 197.00 46.30
2021-01-15 172.60 195.50 46.30
2021-01-14 171.40 194.50 46.30
2021-01-13 168.90 191.50 45.70
]===
(a) lots
(b) LOTS
npv8 on...
(a) jrp figures and...
(b) current ore prices...
would be?...
@Thefrogster - We thought the same. I think one of the LTHs (not sure who. I think it was @Barksy1) who figured it out and was kind enough to share it here. :)
Does anyone know what this company owns?
minera amapari sa
@maddog - That is a shame. Do you think they it could be linked to Eldorodo?
brazauro recursos minerais s/a - This is another subsidiary of Eldorodo.
Look at the future not the past, if the past is a problem go see a therapist, kdnc about to multibag! Feels very close now
@Cause - ah sorry, didn't realise
Thefrogster - They recently sold it for 10$ million. Check out their latest accounts.
@obs - looks like Unamgen Mineração e Metalurgia Sa is owned by Eldorado Gold Corporation:
https://www.abnnewswire.net/companies/de/33166/Eldorado-Gold-Corporation-(de)-33166.html
Good idea regarding using 3.6 for the baseline @Tradecraft. Do say if you need any help with filling in the gaps. I'm sure many on here will be more than happy to help! @tomcat has a good memory.
Last time we were estimating how much secured debt might be owed to the banks US$135m was bandied about. Perhaps this is the reason why net revenue from the iron ore stock piles at the port is still estimated to be $30-40m despite the meteoric rise in iron ore prices? Perhaps we've agreed with the banks that a large portion of the revenues beyond our original estimates will go to them? Yet another possibility added to the growing list! LoL.
As to presenting the outcome of varying your input variables - it's going to be a little tricky I think. 'll be interested to see how you handle it. That's because as I've already pointed out a changing FX doesn't change everything equally. And as @Kiran recently pointed out increasing iron ore prices may increase CapEx due to increasing steel prices. There are other intertwined relationships too on the OpEx. A picture speaks a thousand words. Perhaps 3D sensitivity graphs? Or try animating them for 4D? LoL.
Ob.
@obs yes the FX rate on page 2 is current -- that's just one of what will become several variable inputs in the final model. But you are right to point out that for the JRP baseline I should use the USD-BRL rate from the document.
through / wrong word
l believe they trade throw a different company so that cut the taxs , the hole mining sector is corrupt and Brazilian government done see the true amount of loyalty's or tax now the loyalty's have increased from 2% net to 3.5 % on the gross out put .
Cause17/ your rite l read myself some time ago
Ahem: $61/t * 3.6 / 5.47 = $40/t
That's a pretty amazing job @Tradecraft. I'm glad you are taking my suggestions in the spirit they are intended. Critical, not criticising! ;-)
You'll probably be aware that by using a USD to BRL of 5.47 rather than that used in the JRP of 3.6 on the second page you've implicitly reduced the sale price of the ore from $61/t to $40/t. (61 * 5.47 / 3.6)
I believe they were bought by a Brazilian firm. I remember reading it somewhere..I will try to find it again, given that my memory is accurate.
@obs thanks for the feedback and sensible questions. I've started to rebuild my model based on the (blurry) financials in the JRP. This will provide a more accurate basis for NPV calculations and projected SP based on iron ore price, extended life-of-mine etc. First step is the P&L (link here, in BRL and USD: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ShKK6AHKtcQ-LA27UtLQsWjindhuGPJN/view?usp=sharing). There are some minor rounding errors but I think it's a fairly accurate transcription. Tax is accounted for in this table, as are interest payments -- but there is no separate line for debt repayment. It may be "bundled" in one of the other lines, I will need to analyse the Balance Sheet and Cash Flow first to figure that out -- transcriptions to follow.
But came across this useful site whilst looking: https://app.anm.gov.br/SIGBM/Publico/
@tomcat. I presume the question is who now owns "Unamgen Mineração e Metalurgia Sa"? I have been unable to find out.
still no reports on who bought the villa nova mine unamgen have shipped half the 400,000t stockpiles from?...