Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. 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.
GUG , I read your post, and as you said ‘here is his answer’ I read it to mean here was an answer to him. My apologies if you feel I only skim your posts and am not paying them enough attention.
Also you have been very magnanimous in instructing L200 to allow us to think what we want. So big thanks for that.
I do make mistakes, to be fair, probably due to a lack of omniscience, age and poor education. In fact take off contract should be, off take contract. The fact that it’s not all in the public domain I believe is quite usual with contracts as there is the commercial confidence malarkey.well that’s my understanding of these matters. I think there are other things too that we are not told for the same reason eg the jig and mill **** up and what’s in the contract on redressing that. Then there are my views, which I do point out are just that.
Well me gaviscon is making me burp now, so I can go back to sleep.
Perhaps a good old RNS in the morning to bring hearty cheer to us investors and to uninvested posters too.
Safetyman - "in your working out you show a 66% factor ( that being the Wo3 content of the concentrate we produce). This is incorrect ."
Safetyman. READ the post at 23.33 instead of just skimming it says
"Superflymo has not provided ANY costs of production in his calculation. He deals only with Debt servicing. How does that answer Wasps question ? Here is his answer
"$60m (debt) * 12%=$7.2m / 4 (quarters)= $1.8m per quarter
We only get paid for the WO3 content so: $1.8/66(est grade)*100= $2.7m ish
We only get paid 80% of the marker price so $2.7/80*100=$3.4m ish
So, $3.4m ish / $250 (est market price) = 13,636 mtu = 136.36 dmt (ish)
Hence 130-140 per quarter."
It says "Here is his answer" NOT MINE. Superflymofo's numbers. Take it up with him.
Safetyman - "I don’t think Troajan had contradicted this or misrepresented it. However, you do keep referring to what Troajan has said as bring incorrect."
Troajan said in his 8.04 am Sunday post "anyone quoting 80%/60%/40%,or whatever
is posting MISINFORMATION."
It is incorrect, that's why I mention it
Safetyman - "We may be able to sell our concentrate outside of the take off agreement, but I don’t know- if we could we would sell at market price I would have thought"
Who knows, we don't even have transparency of what the offtake contract is.
Safetyman "I find Troajan knowledgeable on mining matters."
That's nice stick with it and see where it gets you.
GUG. In your post for Saturday 23:33 you said we get paid for WO3 content, in your working out you show a 66% factor ( that being the Wo3 content of the concentrate we produce). This is incorrect . It has been pointed out on numerous occasions to posters as being incorrect, where previously this keeps getting posted.
Where our concentrate has 66% Wo3 content we get 80% of the market price for APT, priced by the mtu . The reason for the 80% instead of full value is because we sell under a take off agreement. I am not privy to all the contracts etc, but we were told this.
I don’t think Troajan had contradicted this or misrepresented it. However, you do keep referring to what Troajan has said as bring incorrect. He has explained that prices paid for metals are quite often traded, but are not put ores. He has by way of example shown the ore price for iron is not actually for pure iron.
So in the interests of clarity, again, 66% Wo3 content in our concentrate enables us to sell at the APT price. That which is sold under the take off agreement is discounted to 80% of to that quoted price.
APT is itself not pure tungsten.
We may be able to sell our concentrate outside of the take off agreement, but I don’t know- if we could we would sell at market price I would have thought.
I find Troajan knowledgeable on mining matters.
Troajan. I direct you to page 12 of the FID entitled Investment analysis.
"Investment Analysis: Based on an APT price profile incorporating a long-term price of
US$300/mtu (66% WO3 product, realising 80% of the APT price"
YET, You say "tungsten,we get full concentrate price,quoted on metal exchanges,for both tin and tungsten.
anyone quoting 80%/60%/40%,or whatever
is posting MISINFORMATION."
It is you, as usual posting MISINFORMATION
Arh . The right to free thought. Pericles said (sic) ‘freedom is the prerogative of those that are willing to fight for it’. Lol.
We have permission.
L200. Let them think what they like.
Dreaming, it is correct to say it’s all speculation until we get numbers in a format that is factual statement.
I am invested, I am optimistic as we move forward. I accept I could be wrong.
I am not, not invested and coming up with names and posting negatively, go God knows what reason.
If I were pessimistic in my view of moving forward with Wres I would sell up.
AIm is speculation, assumptions are speculation. Assumption is made without all the bolted down facts. All we are left with when we are without demonstrable and evidential facts are views.
I think a RNS with very good factual news would be very welcome. Preferably sooner rather than later.
Perhaps a RNS might have ( speculation) things like, increased output, increasing prices, increasing productivity, increased utilisation and availability, increased working time ( up to 7 days), refinanced loan at lower interest rates, grant money coming in, access to more higher grade ores as the open cast mine drys out, processing of the high grade ore from Regua, and news on the Sao Martinho gold ( JV, licence, improved sampling, trial mining, increased resource). Covid got rid of it greatly reduced. Demand for metals continuing to increase. Etc if all come out next week that would be very most excellent, big in fairness many of those things will happen over time. Sooner equals more better.
Oh ! I looked it up the original package was for $35 million, so if debt is now $ 60 million that’s an extra $ 25 million ; which at 12% is an extra requirement of $3million interest not $3.6 million per year which for one month is $250,000 extra and not $300,000 which is $50,000 less.it it’s more betterer.
And if my uncle didn’t have a certain appendage he would be my aunt. This is aimed to both side of this discussion, it’s idle speculation which in all the years it has been done on this board I do not recall being correct once. Idle speculation, when done in the form of guessing how many tons of production may be fun but I hope anyone reading, it, especially new investors, realizes there are a lot of what if, hopes, providing and assuming being done. There is very little goodwill left in MM in this place, we have nearly all complained about his over promising and under delivering, his PR skills, is ambiguous statements. This has all contributed to a lack of faith which in part explains the low sp.
not to say I don’t enjoy people turning themselves in human pretzels to reach their self serving conclusions.
Again this is directed at both the naysayers and the fan club. One thing for sure, we are starting the week at a new low, after what was supposed to be good news last week, so you have to ask again about the messaging and it’s delivery.
And if we say prices are 30% better not 25% and tin is up More than that it’s more betterer.
Using points raised by L200 and From Troajan where he quotes MM saying 100 tons a month to break even: prices are now approx 25% higher, so you need 75tons now. MM would have counted in the interest on the then loan, so let’s say the extra is 30 million at 12 % that’s an extra $3.6 million per year or as some call it 300,000 per month.
So if we can agree prices have increased 25% and the required 100 tons becomes 75 Tons we need to add $300,000. If the APT price were approx $250 per mtu ( I think it is) then 80% of that is $200 per mtu; there are 100 mtu in a ton; so one ton provides revenue of 100x$200=$20000; so if we need an extra $300,000, then it requires 300000 divide by 20000 = 15 tons more.
If we add 75 tons to 15 tons we now require 90 tons a month. However, if the extra loan was not 30 million it becomes less.
It looks like we can bang out 80 tons a month ( 4 weeks down in jan Feb only leaves one month working time in which we must have produced 80 tons - using info from the RNS and estimating) ; so we currently have capacity for 80 tons per month not fully at 5 days.
The better quality ore becomes available soon ( from RNS) and we can start going to 7 day working.
There is the high grade ore to come from Regua too.
There may well be other things to consider, but from me very rough fag packet a 100 tons hits the point where we can think in terms of profit and it looks to be very acheivable and soon.
Oh and there’s the gold too.
Do you think he would have envisaged having around $60m debt when he said 100 tons would be breakeven ?
The $7m a year interest will put that 100 tons a month up considerably.
Thank you Trojan. It seems we are getting close to break even.
Have a great day!
prod costs and debt.
100t per month,is the breakeven,anything over that,is profit,not revenue,profit.
that's from an mm interviews,4/5 years ago.....when metal prices,were on a 10 year low
tungsten,we get full concentrate price,quoted on metal exchanges,for both tin and tungsten.
anyone quoting 80%/60%/40%,or whatever
is posting MISINFORMATION.
rio tinto's average iron content,is probably 30%,but they dont get 30% for a ton of ore sold
they get $150
its easy to mislead ,when you drown the board with repetitive posts,but there's always someone,to correct the misinformation.
ATBVB and have a fantastic week.....last post from me,before the repetitive crew,do the usuual