Member Info for Agricore

One interesting fact from the recent CRUX visit to Afritin was they are considering introducing ore sorting during FY23.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4rcHl-BtXY

This is a first time for a tin mine but some research shows it's used for other metals like titanium, magnesium and gold so no reason why it couldn't work. Anthony claims it can drive 3x to 4x concentration at "very little cost".
https://www.thermofisher.com/blog/mining/opportunities-for-improvement-an-introduction-to-ore-sorting/

Tamesis in their analysis at year end thought the FY23 AISC would be $26,600. Clearly the Q1 results show this to be far too pessimistic.
Hannam meanwhile think an AISC $20,500 is achievable though offer no explanation how they arrive at this estimate.
So I tried to look at ways to calculate what 3x to 4x concentration at "very little cost" would mean in terms of a revised AISC. If it means tin concentrate volumes can triple then this could mean a ~$7000 AISC/tonne. However the world isn't that simple (surely) so I decided Hannam's $20.5k/tonne AISC for the coming 12 months is more realistic.

It does mean profitability improves greatly in FY2023 (y/e 28th Feb 2023): Based on a 750 tonnes of tin, AISC $20,500, Average Selling Price of $36,000, and same overheads as 2022 leads to a GP of $11.6m and EBITDA of some $9m. That's a heck of a result considering.

Perhaps you are missing the obvious: Motivation.

Perhaps Cobre is not sufficiently incentivised by only owning 51% and has said it will focus on its other projects (which it has) which in turn means MTR doesn't get its NSR. Perhaps the reasoning is that better to motivate Cobre and gain on the NSR (at no cost) rather than cling to an asset which isn't generating income? In fact an asset which consumes ongoing cash (which Michael alludes to in the RNS). An asset which lost £0.5m in 2021.

I'd further point out that £1.5m is 25% less than its book value at 31/12/21. Given the ongoing write downs it could be argued that £1.5m is about right - especially too given the depressed valuations to many (all?) miners right now.

Ultimately I agree that we need to hear from MTR and for communication to improve, and I am just speculating. However I would like to think that the sale of KML is following a strategy and the company actually knows what it is doing...... it is a successful and seasoned deal maker and has struck some clever deals (e.g. some of its NSR). Presumably you know that and that's the reason, like me, that you hold shares here? I still believe the patient investor will do very well from MTR. **The long-term fundamentals of copper have not changed**

GLA.

I would disagree that ATM "needs" the price of tin to return to $40k. The progress made on the AISC is significant and further improvements are coming from quite a number of angles:
a/ Recovery improvements
b/ Throughput improvements
c/ Significantly byproduct credits (i.e. Lithium)

"Further Phase 1 plant optimisations and process improvements will drive a reduction in AISC to ~US$20,500/t in FY23. As by-product streams and ore-sorting technology are integrated, this is expected to drive an exceptional, negative AISC of ~US$(5,300)/t on a post by-product basis for the remainder of Phase 1 from FY25E onwards"

It's also true that phase 2 will be transformative however ATM doesn't "need" to accept poor finance terms - it can bide its time if it needs to. That puts it in an extremely strong position. I take Peking's point about rising finance costs and IRR calculations (I cannot find what WACC is being used???) however we are able to use existing cash flow to drive incremental improvement. I'd also point out that the PEA is very conservative. The subsequent drill results are coming in quite a bit higher than the PEA and current prices are higher too. If anything the PEA is a bit of a worst case scenario.

Finally there's no consideration for Brandberg West. This is a further substantial resource belt not wholly dissimilar to Uis. It's "valued" at $0.85m (its purchase price). It's realisable value in today's market is far higher than this so sits on the books as hidden value.

GLA

Today's near 6% rise could be in anticipation of the value of the Swaptions. Although some strong recoveries across most portfolio holdings today too.

Very good read....
Positives:
- Integrated powertrain/invertor/AFT makes a lot of sense - higher value add
- Appointment of David Pates as managing director of its Light-duty e-drive division. David joined from his previous role as the engineering director of Mahle Powertrain Ltd - formerly Cosworth Technology Group (until its acquisition from Audi in 2005). David's industry leading knowledge and expertise has been instrumental in the recent commercial progress.

Negatives:
- Propel's revenue of 1.5m euros equates to around only 250 inboard motors. I have it in my mind that there was a production availability of several thousand (I may have this wrong, and I've reread previous RNSs to try to ascertain this but it would be nice to see a "sell out" and not "unsold inventory" in this proof of concept.
- No mention of the AFT190/Heavy Goods/Buses.
- Scale up will require investment. Are PIs going to be shafted on a discounted offer to IIs?

More questions than answers but positive and look forward to further news in July.

>> This round, which comprised conversion of £762,000 of loan notes (of which £500,000 was provided by NetScientific as announced on 21 December 2021) and £900,000 of new equity, results in the direct equity holding in Q-Bot by NetScientific increasing from 18.3% to 20.6%, in addition to EMVC's Capital Under Advisory representing 16.7%. NetScientific's 20.6% Q-Bot direct stake is valued at £2.77m based on this funding round- a gain of approximately £1.45m in less than one year.

That (paper) gain equates to around a 6p gain on the current share price. Not bad!

Note too ATM's preliminary economic assessment which put Uis at $2.1bn. A PEA is like an estimate of NAV without being substantiated i.e. the execution risk. But if it is already producing tin and proven it can extract lithium how much execution risk remains? I guess you could say the Tantalum module is unproven as yet.

So today's price 6.5p puts the share on a ratio of 0.04 P/NAV or put another way if ATM's share price reflected the NAV value then this would be a ** 50 bagger ** and would trade at around £3.25 a share.

I used today's weakness to top up today.

I bought ATM quite some time ago based on the future prospects of tin. These prospects have not lessened - in fact they've increased. The market doesn't appreciate the sheer scale of Uis and ATM's other land holdings. Anthony mentioned there are 72 pegmatites that they know of. They are part way through analysing 2 of the 72. (V1/V2). We now know that it also holds substantial Lithium and Tantalum. In fact it could possibly be the largest lithium resource in the world. So how do you value any and all of that? If largest means say 5% of world supply and the margin above AISC is around 50% and on a PE of say 10 then the lithium alone puts ATM at £1.3bn* or 17 times its current market cap (17 bagger). ..... and that's just the lithium ..... then we need to consider the tin! Tantalum. Tungsten. Other battery metals?

(*According to Verified Market Research, the Global Lithium Mining Market size was valued at USD 3.27 Billion in 2020 and is projected to reach USD 4.68 Billion by 2028, growing at a CAGR of 5.23% from 2021 to 2028.30 Sept 2021)
NB The price of lithium has quadrupled in 2022 so the above stat is very conservative in my opinion.

The other key point here is that ATM is a *PRODUCER* and not an explorer. I have a number of explorers in my portfolio and there's a lot to be said for having cash flow. I see the fact that a company like ATM is caught up in the sell off part of the "capitulation" which heralds a strong bounce back coming. I am keen to see the Quarterly update (there was one 14th June 2021 so its due any day now) and we will see a strong bounce on continuing strong results and elevated tin prices.

Good luck fellow tinnies!

Today's announcement of £1.39 NAV (as at 31/05) exceeds expectations. The continuing weakness in ONT is an issue although nothing there has changed. In fact the situation has improved somewhat and ONT is still growing strongly and aiming for b/even for 2026.
https://nanoporetech.com/sites/default/files/s3/investors/reports/ONT%20FY21%20Results%20Presentation%20FINAL%2022-3-22.pdf

Meanwhile there are lots of exciting developments (and uplifts) in other parts of IP group's portfolio e.g. Bramble.

Disappointing but not altogether surprising - build and they will come…. Not if the NHS aren’t buying they won’t. We should see some proceeds from the sale of the proton equipment so the final result should be less than the 2.5p reduction of NAV. Meanwhile ONT is rebounding from recent lows and JMAT is doing better. There are some exciting positions in fintech which will come good too. Just like it was for Rutherford…… more patience required!! GLA

Safaniya you appear to be talking about CUSN. You are correct on most of your points although there are 2 other key differences between the two. First is that ATM's resource is a lower concentration, therefore key to ATM being "world class" will be its ability to control costs via scale, via efficient processing and probably most of all through byproduct credits of Lithium and Tantalum. The 2nd key difference is the sheer scale of Uis - and that that Uis is not the only tin resource that ATM holds.

There’s a lot of noise over at Bluebird ventures which MTR holds via Southern. Hopefully gives a positive catalyst. The current low SP here is inexplicable.

…. While people ponder, VLG retraces about 10% from its nadir.

Looking forward to next month’s trading update

https://www.tipranks.com/news/square-teams-up-with-apple-for-tap-to-pay/

Interesting that analysts see this as average upside of 70% according to Tip ranks. If that’s true then TSL is at a circa 70% discount to the future value of its Block shares.

What's interesting is that the £2.60 target price is based around a number of assumptions:
1. A "fair value" discount of 80% (which takes into account dilution or farm in shares of some $1bn)
2. Zero value for the 2nd and 3rd fields of Bowhead, Narwhal, Elke & Blakeney (which could add £19.48 value per share)
3. $100 oil price increasing by 1% per annum (which is below today's spot price)
4. Discounted Cash Flow @ 10% (would you realistically expect 10% return from your next best investment?)
5. FX @ USD/GBP $1.26
6. Energy Profit Levy of negative 58p (Bearing in mind that this could end by 2025)

So - for example - if any or all of those assumptions prove to be too conservative, for example if you believe oil could go higher than $100 then the £2.60 value increases - potentially by quite a lot.

The key point here however is the incentive to invest: "Essentially, we expect entities that are paying taxes on oil & gas porfits to be looking very hard for ways to invest more capital..... as the cash-tax benefit of every pound invested is 91.25p"

I disagree - I’m delighted that FIPP are holding a good chunk of Exscientia - the prospects are very positive:
https://investors.exscientia.ai/press-releases/press-release-details/2022/Exscientia-Business-Update-for-First-Quarter-2022/default.aspx

The best explanation I've found for what's happening to JRS' Russian holdings is this:
https://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/2022/04/update-delisting-of-russian-issuers-depositary-receipts-the-end-of-an-era

JRS holds (held) GDRs and that these are being replaced with conversion to something. The Russian Federal law appears to be clear that the shares remain the legal property of the shareholder and that once an arrangement is made then the shares are restored back (along with accrued dividends as previously mentioned by another posting). There is no expropriation of GDRs as such - although you could argue if they do not provide a replacement then it is effectively expropriation in all but name.

2nd - This is the latest JRS fact sheet
https://jp.techrules.com/rebrandingPDF/LoadPdf.aspx?ShareClassId=540&country=GB&lang=EN¶mMIFID=YES

If you assume that the "benchmark" is roughly the same as JRS' holding (if anything I'd have said this is a conservative estimate and that JRS was energy heavy so would have outperformed the benchmark) then you can there's a 23% drop in the benchmark which equates to roughly the prior JRS price of £7 x 77% = £5.25 "actual" share price. We know there's 40p of NAV in cash and central Asian holdings, so the "off book" value is worth approx £4.85 (£5.25-£0.40) and effectively you are paying another 40p to wait for that £4.85 (which could grow through dividends and capital growth, although I would suggest that future dividends would be lower under sanction hit Russia.

I've owned JRS for several years and was reluctant to liquidate at such a large loss after the price drop. I wouldn't commit more funds on moral grounds although the mathematics of risk/reward seem quite favourable - if you are prepared to wait it out.

Hi Hedged, There are several but I find www.tradingeconomics.com the best of them - clear and provides intraday as well as YOY percentages. Rhodium is about halfway down the list under the "commodities" tab.

The technology tackles 3 huge problems: non-recyclable plastic, the European energy shortage (esp. base load), and fire risk of organic waste. The technology is validated and proven. The economics are terrific. The forecast profits are tremendous. This company feels like a very bright jewel overlooked by the market. I'm delighted to be able to top up at 0.72p this morning.

Hi Tivman, I hadn't spotted it was simply dilution - thank you for clarifying.