Member Info for Billions

Lenoman struggleswith the other afflictions on this board, selective outrage and hypocrisy. Unless you have had your head buried in the sand, this BB is not an altruistic utopia...there are not many posters on here than can take a slightly different opinion.

Most resort to abuse, fake news and lies. Don't see you speaking out then.

Fred stick to the dancing. Fcev are a poc, auto will never be the mass use. Only posters on this BB link pgms to evs. Which is plain wrong and nonsense like much of what is spouted.

Elon musk on hydrogen. Think he know a thing or two:

"Hydrogen is an energy storage mechanism. It is not a source of energy. So you have to get that hydrogen from somewhere. if you get that hydrogen from water, so you’re splitting H20, electrolysis is extremely inefficient as an energy process…. if you say took a solar panel and use the energy from that to just charge a battery pack directly, compared to try to split water, take the hydrogen, dump the oxygen, compress the hydrogen to an extremely high pressure (or liquefy it) and then put it in a car and run a fuel-cell, it is about half the efficiency, it’s terrible. Why would you do that? It makes no sense,”

I'm afraid Pete that's because like many you must struggle with challenge and alternative views.

Dealer, only thing your post proves is that you still need reading lessons!!

The talk was about fuel cell evs. The engine you mention uses li-ion battery hybrid. The likes of which don't use PGMs.

Bumble this is nonsense. I know my evs and chemistry. The fuel cell vehicles are a fraction of the total cars produced less than 10k.

The grid to road efficiency is less than 35% for fcev. This is less than half normal evs. Hydrogen is only available naturally in bonded form. Its need to be split to hydrogen, then compressed stored and transported. Then it is converted back to electricity the in car. To produce 35kwh you need 100kwh of power.

The research and facts are unfortunately lacking on this matter and many other areas on this BB.

Thanks year2020. Yes, at present, fuel cells are the alternative use of pgm. But this is a beta max vs VHS situation. Fuel cells are extremely inefficient and dont currently have many proponents.

At present I think 80% of pgm are used for catalysts. This demand needs to be replaced somewhere else.

Newbie. Couple of points. Pgm are not an ev critical metal. They are for petrol and diesel engines. Stockpiling is for lithium and cobalt.

2ndly, surely if this resource was so critical, the Russians would not have given away the Rosgeo JV and let EUA slip into foreign ownership.

Ethio, just give it up and admit you are wrong. You're making yourself look silly.

DS has 465m shares. Including the ownership by Deloan. He does not own all of Deloan.

Queeld have no relation to DS.

All lot of what is said here is hearsay and half truths.

Long trader had decided to add bear faced lies... shows how reliable so called research and DD from posters on these BBs is.

Thanks newtithisgame. Carp needs to do more research. There are individuals with 300+ posts in the last 30 days mostly recycled or irrelevant.

A definition for you to make a better guess, quite a few fit the bill:

"A person who orders others about domineeringly, or one whose pronouncements on some subject are meant to be taken as the final word"

The way some act is as though this board is their personal dictatorship.

The lack of tolerance for other views has really bought out the worst in people. The abuse and rhetoric is unbelievable at times.

Many of the so called LTH should hang their heads in shame.

And what are your thoughts on how much the 104moz will actually cost?

I was at least expecting some 'facts' and 'analysis' to have a genuine discussion.

That was obviously too much to hope for... the extent of the research is limited to googling companies from Japan or looking up NN and AA meetings.

Source would be good GFD. From what I've seen Artemis/platina haven't got a chance in hell. They fully agreed. This is sour grapes with hindsight.

I would guess that the flanks, rosgeo jv would be in this sub 1% bucket. Mt maybe a bit more. Wk, would be the most per oz basis.

But overall

Overall 5%

I think it can be fairly argued that the eua resource is bigger so would demand a premium.

But you are right, there is a big difference with a development resource and a turn key cash/profit generating operation purchase like Stillwater or NAP.

£2.4m approx. Purchased by empire metals within last 12 months. Tbh, this transaction does not make sense and amounts to 0.14% of in ground value at the time.

I'll leave it someone else to crunch the numbers for eua.

https://www.mining-technology.com/deals-analysis/empire-metals-to-acquire-pilbara-palladium-deposit/

Thanks for confirming my thoughts.

Maybe others on the BB will catch on that the final price is not a "answers on a postcard" competition from over enthusiastic and I'll informed posters with a year 7 cassio calculator!!!

Bergcarls. Lol. You do realise how stooopid you made yourself look.

You took notice and replied. Jokes on you... what a fool.

FILTERED.

CTC. Not discrediting the company all. It's a genuine point which imo explains why the sp hasn't rerated.

It's points like these that many ignore and try to deceive with mad price targets and in ground values. Lord knows how they attribute value when it would take highly paid consultants months to work out.