Member Info for BigBiteNow

(2 of 7)

I must say that when I listened to the words from FM as he worked through these slides, I was filled with a sense of fulfilment, because all the hard digging into the data these last few years really shows itself in the plan that is now being laid out before us.

FM Slide 53 states ;

“we see only primary producers who have existing production platforms that can be scaled up on a brown field basis, as really the only parties that can respond to the current vanadium shortfall or deficit that we see today, and this is a deficit we see only growing stronger, especially as the VRFBs adoption gain momentum, in addition to the strong applications of vanadium in the steel sector”

Let’s let that hang there for a few moments and breathe it in nice and deep. . .

On page 9 of the BMN Annual Report December 2017, it says;

“Bushveld Minerals is one of only three operational primary vanadium producers, and one of only two vanadium focused pure-play companies in the world.”

1. Largo Resources – Currently increasing production by 25%, which is expected on- line in mid 2019. I can just about sell myself the idea that it is “brown field” but as to scale, they are fairly limited in that their main move in this heightened price market is just 25% additional production at a V205 level. Given that we should expect “VRFB adoption” to “gain momentum” and, not forgetting that even without VRFBs the “vanadium demand CAGR from steel is expect to be 2.5% through 2027” (See slide 48), that is short of being a worthwhile response.

2. Glencore – The owners of Rhovan, are not currently demonstrating a willingness to expand production in SA, but then they are contracted to take 100% of the product from Largo Resources for at least the next 2 years. So perhaps they feel that is sufficient exposure at this time. That therefore leaves just;

3. Bushveld Minerals – the owner of the world’s largest highest grade resources, with access to further low cost brown field capacity, which enables BMN to reach 10,000 mtv (not V205) production in circa 2-3 years. That’s more than 275% higher than their 2018 production target, so 10 times greater than Largo.

On the same slide FM goes on to share that;

“This we see does not yet reflect (in the £497m valuation) what we see as incredible potential going forward from the energy storage market that BMN plays in”

(1 of 7)

Whilst there is much to learn and take in from the BMN Energy Storage Webinar 101, the key investment messages for me are expressed in the updated BMN presentation (Slides 51 – 64).

However, what I was looking for from the Mikhael Nikomarov presentation was further stronger evidence that the energy storage market is there. Not because BMN needs it to be fully realised but because the added strength only goes to further cement the investment case in BMN, as it demonstrates that what they seek at this stage is all the more attainable.

That being 10,000 mtv, 200MWh electrolyte production, and 1,000MWh of deployed energy storage systems.

There are a good number ‘leading analysts who are still in denial as to the size of the impact that VRFBs can and will make on the energy storage industry, never mind what BMN is capable of within that sphere. They continue to stare at where the stone hit the water, whilst the real deal is in the ripples that are then created and who is making them.

Now let’s have a closer look at the slides and the commentary.

Slide 39.

“Stationary energy storage demand is forecasted to be the fastest growing types of storage, at a rate of 58% p.a. and will exceed 100GWh by 2027.”

“Multiple technologies will be successful due to unique technical and cost advantages;”

“Flow batteries expected to capture 18% of the market, according to Navigant”

“This equates to 20GWh of demand and nearly $10 billion in revenue by 2027”

“Although many technologies can technically perform the storage function, for utility scale applications the two front runner commercial technologies are flow and lithium-ion batteries. Vanadium redox flow batteries (VRFBs) offer clear advantages technically and financially that sets it apart in large scale stationary applications”

Do I need to believe the 100GWh will be achieved? No. Do I need flow batteries to achieve 18% market share? No. Thus the 20GWh is of little consequence at this juncture, but what all of those figures demonstrate, is that the market is going to be more than big enough for BMN to achieve their initial plans because they are demonstrating they have the very best tools to do so.

If the plans are to be expanded, which the scalable concept certainly allows, then great but it can for the time being at least wait. 10,000 mtv and value chain revenues associated with 1,000MWh will be more than enough to drive a far greater valuation from where we are today (£497m), and enable BMN to further scale all aspects of it integrated model, which is key for me at this juncture.

If the market is there, then it is all about what BMN are doing to penetrate it and how realistic are their chances.

So let’s now focus on those BMN specific presentation slides.

So after such a long post filled day there are no doubt some weary eyes out there.

But if you have the stamina for it then there is a 7 post piece coming your way soon. . .

@skier1 firstly you are absolutely correct there should be room for both bears and bulls in the discussion and I welcome any well thought through posts that you or anyone else may wish to share. But there needs to be substance to what we write, be it bullish or bearish.

I have had many a debate with bearish posters here over the last 3 or so years and yes there have been times when what I have read, has sent me scurring back to my notes, in order to make sure what I knew to be true was actually true. That's pyschology for you.

But as the years have passed I have felt less and less inclined to even answer such posts because the investment case here has grown so much in stature. When this company had dealings with the likes of Darwin, or when it was being seriously shorted by darker forces, there was a fight to be had for those that were bullish, but we had it.

When I was singing the praises of this share when it was 1.3p and FeV prices were just $13 per kg and going nowhere fast, there really was a fight to be had to be heard above the bears, but we had it.

Those days are now gone and although there will always be risks, that one must always be on one's toes, right now the argument for the bears is so weak that it is time wasted trying to explain the merits of the investment, because with all due respect if you are bearish at this stage, then you are never going to be convinced by my argument anymore than I will be of yours.

You talk about financing problems and giant placings at a time when this company is entering the steepest point in its growth cycle, driven by organic investment. If you wanted to do that then you should really have been here 2 years ago, when they had nothing and such words could have perhaps gained more traction.

Vanadium prices may pull back, but such a statement has little worth when it fails to recognise the growth in output that will walk hand in hand with those prices.

In 2020 this company will produce over 5,000 mtv, that's 88% more than they will this year, and this year will deliver minimum £40m profit at an average FeV price of circa $77 per kg. Prices are currently $50 above that average.

At 5,000 mtv this company doesn't need the current $127 per kg prices to make those same profits, it needs prices close to $44 per kg. That's nearly 66% lower than today's price.

That ignores the 10,000 mtv due in 2021 and the strong possibility that prices may just stay some way above that $44 level. What then?

The bubble as you call you it can burst pretty much as far as it likes and it will have no affect on BMN producing consistent profits, and if it does then ask yourself how many mines are going to get financed at $44 FeV, not many I assure you.

We all have the right to speak up here but in doing so there must be substance to our words, not merely the one shoe fits all mentality, that I am currently being offered.

@Skier1 You are of course entitled to your opinion as is anyone here, but let me be very clear, the research points to a completely different scenario playing out, one which I am sure will deliver upside from these levels that many will struggle to appreciate.

I personally do not care whether you or anyone believes what I am about to write, whether you choose to invest or to claw out a small percentage gain by shorting this particualr cycle of this growth story. It holds little meaning in the long run.

In my humble opinion you are partaking in a very small part of what will becomes the greatest AIM mining story of our generation. Believe it, laugh at it, i don't care.

This company is not only enjoying the very best vanadium prices now but will go on to expand through the cheapest available options on the planet, those being local brown field processing, and deliver over 275% growth in production in the next 2-3 years. Show me who else is doing that at this stage of their existence.

That growth will be organic, and it will deliver some of the very lowest cost production in the vanadium space, and it will be delivered before any other new major mine is developed. Thus the vast majority of new vanadium is coming from this company.

However, in addition they are about to launch a fully integrated vanadium VRFB model that will deliver profits along the entire VRFB value chain.

MINING - PROCESSING - VRFB ASSEMBLY -VRFB DELIVERY.

That fully integrated model will house the cheapest VRFB delivery mechanism seen to date and more importantly the the highest local content energy storage solution in South Africa.

Why is that important? Because this company has just spent the last 4 years leveraging their partnered support with the IDC of SA, to open up large scale utility sized battery mandates in SA.

This opportunity has been delivered in the form of 1,440MWh of announced battery projects from Eskom and an government IRP that allows up to 9,000MW of peak shaving energy storage solutions to be delivered between now and 2030.

Those mandates requires Eskom to procure local beneficiated materials that deliver the high local content. The fully integrated BMN VRFB model delivers the highest local content giving the company unprecedented competitive advantage in SA and direct access to those mandates.

Those 9,000MW of business are worth circa $4.5 billion. That's 1 country, 1 market, offering over 64% of the total revenues of the current vanadium market.

The story here isn't about a retrace and any 15-20% gain that comes with it. It isn't about a miner taking advantage of prices now, it isn't even about a miner taking advantage of future vanadium prices. It is about this company setting itself up to take its place in the greatest technological disruption since the internet was born, which makes all this nonsense playing out today the child's play that it is showing itself to be.

I just want to follow up my last 2 posts by clearly stating that the question of whether the world is going to accept energy storage no longer needs to be answered. Anybody who thinks otherwise hasn't done their homework properly.

Nor need we keep asking, is the world going to instigate and support substantial GW scale deployment moving forward, and that battery storage will be involved, because it too has already been answered.

Nor need we ask will the finance be there because there is at least $5 billion on the table and that's more than enough to get the party started. I have no doubt that too will be dwarfed as momentum picks up over the next few years.

By accepting the answer to those 3 questions we can automatically conclude that battery storage will play a significant role in that future market. It has to because the other forms of storage do not allow such significant and widespread take up of energy storage, and energy storage is happening right before our eyes.

So the market is there and it is far bigger than most can currently contemplate.

The questions therefore now turn to which technology is going to win through at which level of requirement. VRFBs have the technological advantage for a great many applications but they need to challenge and prove themselves against lithium-ion on a levelised cost basis.

BMN in the webinar last week demonstrated exactly why they have been supporting the take up of VRFBs.

BMN in the webinar last week clearly demonstrate that when judged against the specific need, VRFBs are considerably more cost effective on a levelised cost basis, when cycled more than once a day.

But they took that advantage further by introducing an outline leasing model, which without doubt will be launched and rolled out by the company.

That model is the key to unlocking the opportunity even when vanadium prices are as high as they are now. It levels the playing field and it gets stronger and stronger, the lower vanadium prices go.

Energy storage is going to happen and it will disrupt the energy market.This is now about what weapons can VRFBs use to carve out a share that is rightly theirs on performance.

One does not have to truly believe that there will be enough vanadium around to support VRFBs to their full potential. One need only believe that BMN with their integrated model, their enormous high grade resources, brownfield capacity, partnerships with the IDC and UET, and now their groundbreaking leasing model, have the ability to carve out a place in that now enormous energy storage market.

There is always something that can go wrong but for me BMN have a scintillating chance to not only penetrate this market but to dominate it and drive it to its natural conclusion because nobody is better placed to attack it.

So it's no longer about will BMN be a successful fully integrated miner but just how successful will they be. .

Here are the last 2 years reports from BNEF.

As you can see in 2017 BNEF was predicting 125GW by 2030.

Now, just 1 year later, they are predicting close to 300GW by 2030

A near 140% increase in just 12 months, which they explain by saying ;

“We have become much more bullish about storage deployments since our last forecast a year ago. This is partly due to faster-than-expected falls in storage system costs, and partly to a greater focus on two emerging applications for the technology – electric vehicle charging, and energy access in remote regions.”

The majority will be utility scale, thus placing VRFBs and BMN front and centre in that growth.

However, BMN don't need even a fraction of that success to take place to drive a 10,000 -20,000 mtv operation. That's the beauty of all this. It isn't about the VRFB market hitting 18% or 25%, it's about BMN scaling up and finding enough custom to satisfy its own nedds in its own part of the world.

If everyone else tags along for the ride then all the better.

https://about.bnef.com/blog/global-storage-market-double-six-times-2030/

https://about.bnef.com/blog/energy-storage-620-billion-investment-opportunity-2040/

In my series of posts entitled 'BM Fully Integrated Fully Charged' said the following of battery storage market forecasts ;

"it is important to appreciate that we are dealing with forecasts in a market that has never been seen before"

"but in my opinion we are dealing with an industry that has the potential to completely disrupt the energy sector"

"Once battery storage technology is established as a market, once they are able to apply true scale to reduce their costs, the forecasts may well all be torn up and placed in the recycling because they simply won’t be bold enough."

Jump forward 2 weeks and we have the enclosed article explaining to us that Bloomberg (BNEF) have upgraded their forecasts.

In last week's Energy Storage Webinar 101 on slide 41 BMN noted that BNEF had updated their forecasts but did not go into specifics, as they were focused on the Navigant data produced for this particular webinar.

However, if we return to the Vanadium 101 presentation slide 19, we see that BNEF were as of last year predicting cumulative storage deployments of 25GWh by 2020 and annual deployments of 40GWh by 2027.

Now they are saying that ;

"Annual energy-storage deployments are now forecast to exceed 50 GWh by 2020. That’s three years earlier than BNEF’s outlook from just last year." and "The majority of storage capacity will be utility-scale until the mid-2030s."

However, if we return to slide 19 of the Vanadium 101 presentation once more, then we see that BNEF was actually predicting total deployments to reach 50GWH by 2023 not annual, as stated by the article.

The annual deployments are as I have already stated, 40GWh by 2027. So if they are now saying that annual deployments will hit 50GWH by 2020, then they are a full 7 years aheadof schedule in just 12 months.

But even if it turns out that someone simply got confused and it is the total deployments. Then they have still doubled their market size prediction in just 1 year.

However, the reality is the exact numbers don't really matter, it is about the speed, it is about the momentum, that is what this is all about.

That is why i have used the ripple effect analogy. The momentum is already so strong that batteries are going to make the high impact that we want to see as BMN shareholders to allow BMN to express themselves fully through their fully integrated model, and that's before we even start talking leasing.

The noise is getting really really loud and eventually the market is going to hear it, and I predict that in 12-18 months there will be conversations had here about how obvious it was but how clearly it was missed by so many.

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/the-battery-boom-to-attract-620bn-in-investment-by-2040-2018-11-19

Well having only been re-invested a few short months I don't consider myself to be emotionally attached to this share. I see it is a buying opportunity at these current levels and not because of some coin flip on Indico-1.

Whether there are issues with Put 9 and 12 or not, is of little concern to me because there is more than enough value and opportunity in other areas of the business. Others may be of a different opinion, which is their prerogative, but here is how I see it and I am prepared to put my hard earned behind it.

Firstly, at a consistent 5,000 bopd and circa $50 brent, this company can still tick over very nicely and continue exploring for oil, and buying up opportunities.

That said, I simply cannot see how having already made a success of it once, that OPEC won't step in to support prices. Heck within a few days of the mid terms being over Saudia Arabia and Russia were already talking about sizeable supply cuts. Plus the curve ball by Trump on the snaction waivers will only work against him as it looks like he suckered the Arabians and OPEC in on the Iran sanctions. Despite that I don't need to see $80-85 oil again, $70 would be more than enough to allow Amerisur space and time, and keep adding to those cash coffers.

CP0-5 is currently in play. It isn't a 1 drill play it is a 3 drill pla, and there is clear evidence that at least 2 of those drills will be conducted by Q1 2019. That said, now that they have started, I feel safe in expecting all 3. Just one decent hit out of 3 will chnage the landscape around here considerably.

Pintadillo 1 hit oil. It is true that we don't know exactly what that means at this stage, but there is a re-mapping action in play and news is due shortly. I cannot see how having achieved such limited drilling this year, and having spent $3.8m on civil works to build the Pad, and having a rig on site ready to go with at least 2 more drills previously planned, that they won't push to start drilling another well, be it this year or early next. From the slides in the Interims presentation, it is clear that Pintadillo-1 sits about half way up the block, thus a push north in this block is a natural development with clear access back to the OBA.

Then there is Platanillo 22, which previously pumped up to 1,000 bopd. It was back at 415 bopd at the last report with plans to increase production in time. Even a rise to 800 bopd when added to Pintadillo-1, would see production back in the region of H1 figures.

Then it is on to Put 8, which whilst having limited news flow attached to it thus far, lies directly west of Platanillo, so has absolutely nothing to do with Put 9 and 12. However, at these pricing levels i can take or leave it for now, because there is more than enough in CPO-5 and Platanillo to drive a far higher SP at $70 oil.

@Faramog I don't believe so. If you refer to my earlier post, I see a pattern in what SP Angel is doing, call it stepping stones if you will.

9th November updated broker target accounting for far more of the supply deficit imapct, but with BE now firmly noted along with ownership levels and target market.

13th November webinar

14th November SP Angel gives greater detail based on the webinar content in order to explainwhat that target market potentially means for the company, including answering the key question of VRFB roll out in times of high prices. hat they need now is the details to allow the stage 1 valuation for BE to be added to the mining arm.

So now it is over to the company to 'launch' the leasing model, demonstrate it's worth in a live contract, disclose the electrolyte plant deal, and secure large scale mamdates.

Then SP Angel can complete this particular ripple before we all move onto the next one.

FM stated very clearly in the 17th October that none of the current research not much is being said about BE in terms of its value contribution to the companmy. SP Ange is the house broker.

Now that the framework has been communicated, the company can release the key components of that knowing that the market has had a good chance to understand where each element sits within the greater plan.

That's how I see it anyway.

Wonderful story FB.

Thank you Alfacomp, much appreciated. I am delighted they have a home where they will hopefullynot be forgotten.

I am planning to do a full analysis of the webinar once the audio is available. There were some key points said by both FM and MN. I wrote a few down but I would very much like to hear them said again.

And to answer your question more correctly, I believe we will see the commencement of the increase from 5,000 plus mtv to 10,000 plus mtv in 2021.

It should be remembered that as quick as brownfield is to ramp up compared to greenfield, it still needs to be bought, it needs to be signed off from a regulatory point of view, it highly likely needs to be renovated, and it needs to be fed.

I see 2019 being the year of the purchase and the regulatory approvals. I see 2020 as the year of renovation and gearing up for production. Then 2021 will be a ramp up year.

That should give Vametco 1 full year of phase 3 expanded production along with 1 full year of electrolyte production at 200MWh.

Just my thoughts so please don't take them as read. The point is these things do take time, but look around and tell me who of significance will be bringing a major new vanadium mine into production before 2021.

Whilst there may be a regulatory process involved in any brownfield purchase, it is nothing compared to a mining permit process. Just ask the Americans.

@Ninvestor In the series of posts entitled 'BMN Fully Integrated Full Charged' I said the following ;

"Once battery storage technology is established as a market, once they are able to apply true scale to reduce their costs, the forecasts may well all be torn up and placed in the recycling because they simply won’t be bold enough."

The webinar presentation only goes to further support that argument.

Slide 41 states the following ;

In the 3rd May Webinar BMN presented a scenario where by VRFB would capture up to 25% of the energy storage market by 2027. Meaning VRFB demand would amount to some 9,250 MWh and an additional 50,,875 mtv of demand when using 5.5kg per KWh.

Jump forward to November (just 6 months later) and at a revised 18% VRFB market share and using 20% less vanadium content in the electrolyte (4.4kg per KWh), the prediction is for VRFB demand to be 18,700 MWh and an additional 82,280 mtv of demand.

And that isn't even the best case scenario on that slide.

With BMN presenting those sorts of numbers, I would think that every effort is being directed at bringing home the 5,000 mtv, the 10,000 mtv and much much more.

Remember BMN is the holder of the largest high grade vanadium resources in the world. If the world wants 82,280 mtv more of vanadium to feed the battery led energy revolution, be they BE batteries or someone elses. . .

they are going to need to come to and see Bushveld Minerals.

Love them or hate them, SP Angel rather conveniently updated their Mining Flash Note on BMN on 9th November, just 1 month after their previous note and just 4 days prior to the Webinar.

For the first time SP Angel broke down the group into the various elements.

Then having presented their 87p valuation based on Vanadium prices of $75 per kg in 2019 and phase 2 production of 3,750 mtv (current prices are $125 per kg), they said this ;

"We have yet to add value for Bushveld Energy which is working to deploy vanadium redox flow batteries in grid as well as industrial applications in South Africa. The company is also working with the IDC of South Africa to build an electrolyte manufacturing plant."

None of the opportunity that was presented yesterday in the Webinar is currently prices into the SP Angel valuation, and their valuation already estimates a 40% reduction in vanadium prices in 2019.

Coincidence or was it a co-ordinated plan to better express the size of the investment opportunity that the mining platform has prior to the energy platform being introduced.

For me, yesterday opened the door to allow investors and analysts to understand the size of the opportunity and the outline plan that BMN have to exploit it. Coupled with what the mining platform is already doing and the cash flows it is achieiving, there is plenty of room to understand that the potential far outweighs the valuation.

Next comes the plans and the details, whether they be released individually or simultaneously doesn't really matter, it's that they are clearly coming, sending those analysts in house and out, scurring back to their desks to adjust those 87ps a whole lot higher.

Please ignore the NOT, not sure why I corrected it. Its been a long but beautiful day

Ramaphosa appointed ministers and NOT Zuma detractors

Anybody that is giving South African politics only a tertiary glance really needs to look much deeper, because there is arguably as much value to be gained from the turn in SA politics as there are from other more obvious fundamentals.

Firstly, Ramaphosa is on the side of right, and is slowly bu surely driving an agenda that will see SA recover from its darkest post Apartheid years and enable such companies as BMN to relaise the investment and interest that they truly deserve.

It may look on the surface that Ramaphosa has been going soft on several of the Zuma croonies and indeed the ex-president himself. But the reality is he is playing a this far beautifully scripted game of chess, which is built on a long game play.

There are two factions in play and the Zuma led one still carries a great deal of power, which Ramaphosa has had to walk wisely with. It should not be lost on anyone that at the recent InvestSA conference, it was the Ramaphosa appointed ministers and Zuma detractors that led the unified front to attract new investment in SA.

It was Mantashe and Gordhan backing Ramaphosa at that conference not Mabuza or Magashule.

Ramaphosa from the start has had his hands full with the ANC top 6 perfectly split between both these factions. he has therefore had to respect the need to respect the enemy and find alternative ways of winning the war.

He has known from the start that the one place that had proven to be free from state capture, free from the reach of Zuma, was the SA judiciary. Therefore, waht he needed to do first and foremost, which is what he did, was stop the biggest leaks and start to turn the ship around.

So he acted on the SOEs, he replaced the diseased BOD of Eskom with trusted faces, he replaced the captured minerals minister, and he made sure the support was there by ousting the captured ministries of energy and public enterprises.

By doing this he bought time and commenced the path to trust once more, thus allowing him to make sacrifices is less influencial positions for Zuma followers and giving the judicial process time to run its course. Gigaba is a prime example of that waiting game, as is the recent declaration that Zuma must pay his own costs.

Brick by brick the Zuma empire is being dismantled and Ramaphosa will win the day. He has already done enough to win the 2019 elections, and that will be more tha enough to cement his leadership. Just watch what happens to Zuma then.

It may not look like it on paper but SA politics are on a clear path to correction and the timing could not be better for BMN and it's plans for an energy storage revolution.

https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/just-in-gigaba-falls-on-his-sword-and-resigns-from-cabinet-20181113

Yes you may well be right. I would like to listen to the commentary again before getting too much into the specifics, but as has been posted here previously, the webinar looks to be the tabling of the business case, which then brings more validity and understanding to the information and developments as they are released.

Note the BE update is still outstanding. The leasing model product is definitely high on the agenda with the word "launch" being used. If it's launched with a specific project in mind, which I suspect will be the casde, as this will add greater validity to the business case for it, then that will give off some sparks.

It is a great time to have time on your hands.

Thank you Ophidian that is very much appreciated.

You know me, I do like to espouse now and again.