Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
We have everything to the east accessible from the Dalton corridor, without the expense of dealing with the Sag River and everything to the west to the extent that the shelf margin thins significantly at its landward boundary. Great result!
The company state that they will conservatively need $120m to first production NOT $150m - a figure some choose to pluck from thin air. (See last presentation and last webinar)
Moreover, they state that they will be financially self-sufficient within 12 months of first production (see last webinar at 20mins. 50sec.).
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB9YIsKIEbA&ab_channel=sheepenthusiast
Yes, I saw her face, now I'm a believer
And not a trace of doubt in my mind.
Said I'm a believer
I'm a believer
I'm a believer
Said I'm a believer
I'm a believer
I said I'm a believer
I'm a believer
James,
"MY PANR holders" !!!!????
Did I miss the overnight RNS announcing your acquisition of 51% of the share capital ???
I would sign off 'your loyal subject' but alas I'm from God's red rose side of the Pennine and wouldn't want to choke on my Cocoa Pops.
You are sounding more of a braggartly twonk with every post, if you don't mind me saying so.
Love from Lancashire. 😜❤️
17.07 again.
I can only assume that you have either not read and heard the presentation or have completely misunderstood it. Likewise those who have ticked up your post.
All your doing is picking out a headline project life cost. Tell us what the project life value is. Tell us what the overall project surplus is.
Do you know anything about cashflows payback, ROCE and ROI?
All baseline projections based on what has been seen at Alkaid with no further improvement anticipated in the base case cashflows and financing models.
SLB figures are considerably more bullish taking into account the projected improvement of reservoir quality further north and west.
As I said, I too appreciate Scot's contributions for the most part.
I do not think his mention is particularly relevant in response to my post. Experience show his mere mention one way or the other is immediately likely to skew any debate.
Like you happy to agree to disagree - there are more important matters at hand.
OW, whilst I have the greatest respect and admiration for your informative knowledge and your views, and, for the most part, of Scot, however my post was very clearly not seeking your take on life.
I think we're all getting cheesed off with the constant bickering over what Scot may have said or done and his contributions being held out as a barometric reading for or against any particular stance.
Perhaps SG22 would like to respond?
You want a meaningful debate, that's fine.
I reproduce my post of 15 Nov 19.24 below in answer to yours of 18.40 the same day
"With a moniker like yours, it appears surprising that you apparently fail to understand that these organisations are not sitting of huge cash piles and reserves. If you have the latter, either you have the cash or you use it to leverage in debt set against assets and reserves.
If you have neither, as is the case with most exploration companies, you need to flog equity. Regrettably, it appears to dilute the value of others' holdings, but all in the hope that you can prove commensurate value, by using the cash wisely, to at least equalise the situation. In the case of PANR, its a case of proving up the asset and the means by which it can be extracted from the earth. It's all a bit 'jam tomorrow', but what's new? Once value is crystallised and it will be here, of that i am sure, then happy days.
In this case, we have an executive and a couple of like-minded investors who are prepared to provide the equity without too much of a call on the retail investors.....and what a blinder they are playing!"
I don't recall receiving a response.
I don't believe my post to be ramping merely a true representation of what goes on in explorer companies with a positive slant because
Firstly, I believe in the company, its current strategy, its management and what they appear to be achieving, and;
Secondly, I'm a shareholder.
The RNS of the same day covers financial solutions to the next two payments under the term agreement, leaving the next one you currently are taking issue with at some time toward the end of Q2 2024.
There's a lot of water to flow under the bridge until that juncture and the company has already stated that it is in discussion relative to other funding solutions with other parties. It is perfectly feasible, given further testing results are due, and negotiations may be ongoing, that we may never get to the point of having to raise the funds due in late Q2 2024 as alternatives may by then be in place. All of which you might consider to be the positive slant.
The negative slant as you appear pre-disposed to point out is that the current funding structure is not replaced, remains and will require a further payment in late Q2 2024.
I'm not sure anyone would disagree that, at this point, funds will need to be raised to pay that instalment, if the current structure remains in place. To assume it will lead to shareholder value dilution is wholly premature IMHO.
I fully accept you are entitled to your opinion in an open discussion forum, but I find your motivation somewhat difficult to understand.
Perhaps you would explain what it is?
18.40
With a moniker like yours, it appears surprising that you apparently fail to understand that these organisations are not sitting of huge cash piles and reserves. If you have the latter, either you have the cash or you use it to leverage in debt set against assets and reserves.
If you have neither, as is the case with most exploration companies, you need to flog equity. Regrettably, it appears to dilute the value of others' holdings, but all in the hope that you can prove commensurate value, by using the cash wisely, to at least equalise the situation. In the case of PANR, its a case of proving up the asset and the means by which it can be extracted from the earth. It's all a bit 'jam tomorrow', but what's new? Once value is crystallised and it will be here, of that i am sure, then happy days.
In this case, we have an executive and a couple of like-minded investors who are prepared to provide the equity without too much of a call on the retail investors.....and what a blinder they are playing!