RE: SASA Comparison12 Oct 2018 15:46
Fascinated by the lack of interest around this share today given the imminent news.
Having said that it's allowed me add further to my collection.
Excellent write up/assessment by martina07 below:
Well SASA is slightly higher in tonnage at 23mt than Toral (so far) but the SASA grades around 4% for lead & Zinc are considerable lower than Toral, as is the silver content. SASA Operating costs are very low at $760 /tonne, which is why that mine is so profitable. Even so, if Toral OPEX were , say between $1200 & !500 / tonne that would still give a useful , clean margin of $1000 /tonne +.
It seems quite unusual for CAML to have actually bought the SASA mine outright, given that they weren't a particularly large company in the 1st place (£200m or so), but they managed to do that with a loan from their offtake partner and by issuing more shares. It goes to show that any potential purchaser/ JV Partner of Toral need not necessarily be one of the mining Big Boys, such as Glencore or Rio etc.
To my mind, it seems even more likely, that the likes of international mid cap companies such as Lundin (mkt cap approx £3.2 Bn) or Boliden (£6.8 Bn) would be operating well within their financialresources if they were to make a similar £307m bid (or JV) for Toral. assuming all proved up satisfactorily in the Scoping Study.
To put that into context, with 5.6 Billion shares still in Issue at EUZ, that would equate to a price of 5.4p per share. Even allowing for £75m of capex (or $100m) to build the mine, that would equate to approx 4.1p per share.
Food for thought.
IMHO. DYOR. GLA.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
