Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
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.
Safety, I think gold is a red herring at the moment and doubt if I will see it during my time investing in WRES. I’m hoping for an exit point next year as it’s been too long in the making.
Just to clarify on all the doings:
From my calculations for a given amount of dirt bunged in we are now getting more tungsten coming out. All the stop start is inefficient. So if things carry on improving it’s going to get better.
Now where’s the gold, news soon perhaps?
And how is Regua?
And any news soon on the grant?
Looks better than it has for while imho.
I agree mate. Just 2 years later than I hoped. As long as I don't drop dead in the meantime lol
On the same point, I don’t listen to the rampers either, anyone who says this will be 2p this time next year has no idea, although I’d be very happy if it was. Improved production and showing a profit will move this up to where the market believes it should be, and even with a large serviced debt I believe it will be significantly higher than where we are today, but please don’t invest purely on my beliefs, lol
Thanks Franny, I just like to look at what the rns says in simple terms and what I have read seems positive and tells us that things are moving in the right direction with the team addressing the problems in a pro-active but cautious way, more haste less speed springs to mind. As for the doom mongers, I tend not to listen to them as they don’t seem to look at the bigger picture, and just see what they want to see
I’m certainly no expert but I live in Buxton and we’re surrounded by quarries, many of my friends work in these quarries and they tell me the only time production stops is a few days at Xmas for routine maintenance, apart from that they never stop which gives them optimum output. Although your maths makes sense I think the reality is that if the plant doesn’t stop the production number will be significantly higher than just a pro-rata calculation. That’s my understanding and that’s why I’m quietly confident that within 6 months we’ll be a lot happier with the production numbers, just my opinion though
Ollcity...nice to hear a balanced and positive viewpoint instead of the all the inflammatory b*llocks these boards normally attract.
Ollcity, thank you for that. I am prepared to assume your knowledge of how plant works will be better than mine, given mine tends to zero. To clarify, what you are saying is that my simple calculations, whereby I have scaled up production by simply multiplying by 7 over 3, will more than likely not provide the complete picture and that there are scale benefits by operating for longer periods. I suppose that makes sense to me due to time spent 'stop-starting'.
So if anything, my calculations, everything else being equal, almost paint a worst case scenario.
Try not to overthink the ‘nuts and bolts’ of the plant improvements and focus on the fact that they have already moved to 4 days/wk and have stated that very soon they will move to 5 days/week. With this gradual approach the confidence in the improvements should soon propel this to the promised land of 7 days/wk where we should see the numbers we are expecting. This is my view anyway
As an aside reading the following in the RNS
“ Plant production and metal recovery have been increasing since the implementation of the plant improvements and importantly during this period there have been no major specific changes to equipment or the process.”
If they had been fitted, would the rollers etc that we were waiting for the Mill be classified as major specific changes. As no reference to them coming in and being fitted I am not sure, presumably, as this issue was clearly identified as a major issue it would be, just thinking out loud unless someone has an answer
“ La Parrilla has been working to a 24 hour / three day per week continuous production schedule....” you are quite correct, my apologies, was tucked in the middle and I missed it. But that was my assumption in any case.
My point that there has been no explicit confirmation that the Mill parts have been delivered, installed and operational still stands, as they made such an issue of it before you would think they would wish to highlight it instead of focusin* on cleaning scrapers
It’s in yesterday’s RNS which I see as quite positive. Mining operations need to work constantly as in 24 hrs per day, 7 days a week to achieve maximum efficiency. Stopping and restarting is extremely inefficient hence the production/output figures not being to everyones liking. When this is running 24/7 you should see a vast improvement in output so don’t panic, adding an extra day gradually will ensure 24/7 is not too far off, be patient , this will come good
Use the FILTER
Q3 2020 Overview
In Q3, the plant improvement programme included modifications to the cyclones and hydroclassifier to improve feed distribution in spirals and shaking tables, repairs to improve jig efficiency, modifications to the shaking tables, and installation of cleaning scrapers in conveyor belts to reduce cleaning time and improve efficiency.
From July 2020, the Company has been able to access Spanish Government initiatives to support the reduction of labour costs. La Parrilla has been working to a 24 hour / three day per week continuous production schedule, to provide the operational and maintenance teams the much needed access to plant and machinery to implement the plant improvements on existing equipment. Importantly this has provided the opportunity for additional Geometallurgical and Process studies to better understand and to resolve the low tungsten metal recovery.
It's in this RNS.
It is the fact that whilst he refers to 24 hours for four day but not for three days combined with the fact that they have had to change working patterns that has led to this ambiguity. I haven’t the time to go through each RNS, but as a matter of interest, You said prior RNSs refer to 3 day 24 hour working, what was the date of the RNS that stated it was 24 hours a day three days a week?
Read all the rns? It clearly states that La Parrilla has been working to a 24hr/ three days per week schedule, read the overview section, MM can’t be any more transparent than that
Given that the Rns refers specifically to transparency, the question of whether the days a week up till the end of September being 12 hours or 24 could have easily been resolved with a few extra words. I suspect it was working 24 hours a day for three days. Granted that it makes the results worse but we will at least not be kidding ourselves. It’s just another illustration of sloppy writing when preparing the RNS, which leads to questions that lead to doubt.
Hi everyone, thank you for posting some figures explaining the output for Q3.
From what I understand MM was targeting the 200 per month based on a 7 day 24hr working week.
Is the 3 day week based on a 24hr working day or 8 hr day? That could change the figures massively.
Good luck everyone
Wasp
Thanks for your help GIT. I need to go away/ find time to look at the break even point.
Safety - that would make sense to me.
As I understand things if we produce W concentrate at 66%. We get for each mtu The same as the price for a mtu of APT. if we get higher Than the 66% perhaps we get more money per mtu?
Disco
No problem mate, it’s the same calculation for the tin mate, but in that case it’s, 42.7% of 22.9 tons
Nice Bristol.
I believe Break-even is 80 - 100 depending upon price - so with a ongoing fettling from Pablo & co increasing the run rate should make Q4 results very interesting. Potentially positive cashflow in H1 2021 = 1p+ (IMO, DYOR etc etc)