Member Info for Daisan

Dubmaskullunga,

There was no reaction in gold or currency markets to the tariff imposition and the Shanghai Composite Index is up 3% so I am not sure that the markets are particularly interested.

MenoMosso,

The end of March is when the dividend policy was meant to be put in place. That was certainly not taken well by the market and seemed to damage sentiment.

Aisee,

Whilst the theory of selling at a certain level and buying more at a lower level is fine, the practice is somewhat more difficult to accomplish. Timing the market is not simple otherwise everybody would be doing it. And traders on AIM tend to be talking relatively small sums on the whole where it is simple to move the money in and out of even modestly liquid shares. To move a large amount out of the share and back in is more problematic. The sell side may well put pressure on the share price and promote buying from others whilst the buy side may have the opposite affect or worse promote more buying which causes the buy back price to be higher than desired.

Add this to the fact that the majority of traders tend to leave the market with their tails between their legs having got a good kicking and you can see that, whilst appealing, to achieve this is difficult (not impossible but difficult!).

The Vanchem deal is difficult to argue with if your target is to significantly increase production in the medium term. Greenfield development would take longer and cost more. But it is not off the agenda and the resource is big enough to supply Vanchem and, ultimately, a greenfield operation. As I have said, the world will move to Vanadium operations with significant scale and if BMN wishes to be one of them then this is not only a desirable deal but a necessary one.

Interesting end to the day as well. Market makers quick to drop the bid right at the end.

charlieR123,

These mines are (this mine is) having NO impact on BMN's share price any more than they are having an impact on the current Vanadium price. This is just a case of looking for the cause of an affect and I am afraid that you are barking up the wrong tree.

I don't think that anyone is arguing about this coming on stream. The point being argued is that this has zero impact on the current Vanadium price. None. Zilch.

I am not sure how a Vanadium mine opening in 2022/23 is responsible for a Vanadium or BMN share price drop in 2019. The Vanadium price drop has, however, assuredly affected sentiment towards miners. Should the quarterlies come in positively it will be a short term push and pull between the Vanadium price and increasing production. However, in the medium term I still do not believe that Vanadium pricing has reached the end of this particular price period whilst in the longer term I expect both relatively low Vanadium pricing and high production levels. I have no doubt that there will be future Vanadium miners that produce 25k+ tonnes per annum and I expect that BMN will be one of them.

Very significant given California's position as the leader of what is still the largest economy in the world and the biggest producer of carbon emissions.

It does make me laugh how dynamic these companies are though - this is the start of a four year pilot. Four years. Presumably that is the precursor to a ten year study followed by a twenty year consultation period before the fifty year rollout should the go ahead be given and the world still exist.

There is definitely something interesting happening with deliveries to the US.

Looking at the data and calculating the average delivery per day and the variation by month, we get:

2017 - 4928kg, Lowest Month - 2499kg, Highest Month - 7964kg
2018 - 3966kg, Lowest Month - 613kg, Highest Month - 8067kg
2019 - 6035kg, Lowest Month - 5376kg, Highest Month - 6328kg

Which suggests that the deliveries have not only gone up substantially (and running at a higher rate than 2017) but that the consistency of delivery has changed enormously - there was only 100kg per day variance for the first three months.

Looking at it further, there seems to have been a significant increase in December and January followed by stability and then a further significant increase in April. Indeed, if you look at the latter half of April and into early May, this would suggest that this increase occurred at some point into April.

Whilst it is difficult to draw too many conclusions without knowing the percentage of material being shipped to the US (it may well have shifted to an area where the prices were higher), it does seem to suggest that production is heading in the right direction and that there is a much more consistent delivery schedule than previously (could this be representative of a new agreement with Wogen?).

Interesting to note that moving to 10k mtv and 1000MWh electrolyte per annum in the medium term would mean that most of the increase would go to electrolyte production as this equates to 5.5k tonnes. As such, based on he currently envisaged production profile, the steel industry cannot rely on Bushveld producing more product should the VRFB uptake proceed as anticipated.

It's Friday before a bank holiday weekend in a week where the price rose 25%+. You are bound to get profit taking.

The Asian Metals prices look like they haven't been updated unless everything is falling exactly the same as yesterday.

I have never managed to get a handle on the actual resource left at Mapochs. Is it played out or was it just uneconomic at the time given the price of commodities at the time?

I believe that it has some processing facilities but not sure to what extent. Should there be some useful equipment there, the most likely party to be interested in this is Tando given that they are pretty close.

The dividend policy can be linked to free cash flow. As that takes into account capital commitments there is no reason why the policy cannot be announced whilst still having the cash resources to deliver on their stated goals. Of course, this can create a lumpy dividend but I think most of us would buy into the argument that the money was better used in taking advantage of the opportunities that present themselves.

From 29 minutes.

https://www.v o x markets.co.uk/articles/bezant-resources-galileo-resources-and-john-meyer-97a9952/

Hmmm. Something going on in the background as the trades didn't seem to warrant that shift either.

Well, I would be a bit miffed if I was the victim of those trades although in all likelihood they will subsequently be reversed.

The trading didn't seem to require a change in the ask but that's what they did. They don't seem to want to encourage buying for some reason.