Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Ye Gods, the world's gone mad. Our resident troll gets sensible posts deleted (along with a couple that unfortunately had strayed into abuse) yet the poster who strains all our patience, and has undoubtedly driven sensible posters away, remains.
Much more of this and he'll have the forum to himself.
236k T of copper @ $10000= $2.36B
313k T of zinc @ say $2500= $782m
Total say $3B plus a bit of lead..
Of course, this is still in the ground and is valued much, much, lower by orders of magnitude, plus even that top line market value needs discounting for both time and cost. Our friends in the data room will be busy with their spreadsheets modelling this, which is beyond my capabilities; but I suggest the value of EST even at this early stage must easilt justify AW's assertion that "the value of Verkhuba alone significantly exceeds the current market capitalisation of the Company", reaffirmed when the SP was pushing 3p.
I would expect the SP and Mcap, still only £8.5M, to trend higher once this news gets digested. Not that i know anything, mind, so dyor, etc, etc....
I took the reference to cashflow soon to mean a likely farm in or JV.
Correct on the Jorc, tho, est at 5 to 6Mt on the open pit alone, not the 19 to 23Mt he quotes. And yes, unwarranted assumption on further BHP funding. Well pointed out.
Worth reading. Not a poster I'm familiar with, but he appears to sum up the case well.
https://x.com/GungHoStocks/status/1782146358280888828
Worth remembering AW's words from the 3 April RNS "East Star believes the value of Verkhuba alone significantly exceeds the current market capitalisation of the Company and as such will only consider proposals that offer a fair valuation for shareholders and exposure to the near-term production potential of the Copper Deposit at a time when a multiyear copper bull market is being predicted by most market analysts.and as such will only consider proposals that offer a fair valuation for shareholders and exposure to the near-term production potential of the Copper Deposit at a time when a multiyear copper bull market is being predicted by most market analysts."
That "East Star believes the value of Verkhuba alone significantly exceeds the current market capitalisation of the Company " was repeated on 10April under questioning in the presentation, when the SP was at today's levels.
One cannot place one's entire faith in the words of a CEO talking his own company up, but....that's as clear and positive a statement as I've ever seen other than in the mouths of charlatans and fraudsters....which AW is not. The JVs with BHP etc speak to that , those cos would only partner with a serious operation, imv.
So I'm happy to hold here thru the JORC and beyond. Let's see what happens in midsummer with the FO talks.
What will move the SP, and mb prompt a bid, even, is the offtake agreement that we are expecting to provide the balance of capex funding needed.
Neil has been v bullish over this , painting a picture of ALL having several options.
When THAT news lands, we're off.
You could be right, tho we don't know the budgeted capex on drilling etc across various projects so mb not. I am a little disappointed not to see more progress on Mine Life Extension, but am confident Segun knows what he is doing.
HarChris.....what a contrast to that other place we both post. Very happy with founder's management and delivery here, for me he's earned shareholder trust and deserves a little slack when timescales slip a tad.
Well, 8 days since that last post, and now over 40 days since the VAT refund was declared "imminent". At best, this is creative use of the English language.
At worst, seriously misleading, perhaps bordering on criminally so. Will it ever arrive? Was it ever real in the first place? Who knows?
A useful clarification this morning.
Those posting that they "saw off" the "derampers", etc who queried these things would do well to consider that the RNS refers to previous "ambiguity", which was serious enough that the company was willing to stump up A$250,000 to clear it up.
These things matter ; I suspect that had this not been addressed now, such "perceived ambiguity" (SB's words) could have caused some difficulty further down the line when looking at FO, partnering, fundraising, etc, which could have proved far more expensive than A$250k in terms of delay alone.
Next steps will be further drill results, but the real next milestone for me is the PFS on the pilot plant, and financing thereof.
Yes, i didn't mention that the 2022 projections by ARC that i based my inv decision on was based on $1700 gold, now testing $2400.
Of course inflation has hit AISC but that's still only c. $1200, I think..and the POG has to hold up at these higher levels. Even so, this sharte is overlooke, under traded, and undervalued.
In June 21 this listed at c. 20p. At the time it had not started production, had $81.5m in debt and other liabilities.
At 30.9.23 net debt was down to $19m, should be less at 23 YE, and even with some capex at Segilola and explo costs at Douta, must be well cash +ve at 24 YE, if not well before.
Agree with Harchris that with a clear MLE plan and a PFS at Douta, 25p has to come as a minimum.
Add in a competent founder who has delivered this mine to plan. Life extension plans are a little later than some would like, but should be low capex and easily delivered.
Douta has also run a little late, but that's par for the course in the mining sector, and with Segun's record at Segilola I've no doubt it will be progressed soon. With gold testing $2400 this SP should be doing 50% from here easily.
AGEOS wrote, inter alia", As it has not been so disclosed we can assume that the TiO2 resource discovery is not subject to a similar performance-based payment or an equivalent."
That is my assumption, too, but when reading contractual terms assumptions can be a dangerous thing! In terms of the share based payments, I'm sure neither SB nor Century are losing any sleep over it.
I'm sorry to bang on about this, because I'm confident that nothing is amiss here. BUT..the RNS speaks off, and specifies terms for, CU/Au throughout, ans is silent on other minerals. Imho we should not be left assuming the terms applying to other minerals, and it should be publicly spelt aout as clearly as for Cu/Au.
AGEOS, thanks for your reply. Maybe before I post again on this subject, I should email the co and ask them to clear it up.