Member Info for HarChris

The last part is only partially true Daisy, well prices have been more than high enough until recently to be in a totally different spot to where BMN finds itself.

The average sales price for BMN in 2021 was $32.5/kgV

The average sales price for BMN in 2022 was $41.4/kgV

The average sales price for BMN in H1 2023 was $37.4/kgV

Armed with $65m of funding from Orion the above prices were more than sufficient to be supportive in a considerable scaling up of production which would have reduced costs and insulated BMN against what we are seeing now, much lower prices than the above. What we're about to see is a posting of ~3700mtV of production vs what was achieved in 2020, the year of covid before all of the Orion money was invested of 3631mtV.

The 2018/19 V spike transformed BMN from a minnow into a potential giant, prices fell yes but the opportunity was still there to turn Bushveld into the world's leading vanadium business ex China and Fortune fu**** up that opportunity, plain and simple and Craig is now left with salvaging what he can against a very challenging backdrop.

The bigger difference is that I wouldn't be here if I thought all was lost or that the share price wasn't, on the balance of probabilities, going to rise in the future. I'd have cut my losses and kept my frustrations to myself.

To claim i'm some sort of board mouthpiece when there is undeniable progress on the operational side is ridiculous - if I was being deluded and dressing up every failure as a positive somehow then it would be reasonable to make such an accusation but pointing out and promoting the huge year on year growth in CPO production seems reasonable and valid from an investor perspective to me.

Pardon? I happen to come at things from a more positive angle, probably because I have a far lower average than you and you come at everything from a negative, more pessimistic angle. There's room for both points of view, it's what gives balance but you are intent on personalising the debate in what appears to be an attempt to stamp out alternative views.

You do you and I'll do me.

As for NAV, usually you'd expect to command a price earnings multiple on any profit too, which I'm hoping we'll see posted soon. 3p would be a good start but somewhere between that and the broker forecast of 9.5p is my target.

And 4/5 of mine, essentially the Q&A was mine and yours then Fara.

Record quarterly numbers for Q3 in Jan are a given imo but the market reaction will depend on just how high it comes in - closer to 2500T won't be met with much excitement but the other end of the spectrum of say 3500T+ and I think a reversal would be on. The higher end would mean the company are now seeing considerable cash generation and would put to bed any chance of a repeat like we've just seen with the cln cash repayments.

Up next though is the half year report which will be released within the next 10 trading sessions - hopefully some detailed positive post period highlights.

Nobody gets paid to whinge on a message board frequented by such a minimal amount of users.

You can see examples all across LSE of people selling and then willing that company to fail/share price to fall afterwards - it's a very common thing as ugly and unpleasant as it is. That's all that's going on here.

It should be noted that SPR have the same deal for 39.7m shares, expiring on the same date.

BEE has a sort of similar agreement, although for six months from completion of Vametco acquisition and at an undisclosed price, to keep their holding at 13%. They currently own 233m out of roughly 2.4B once all shares are issued bar options so to get to 13% would be another 80m or so. A third party would also be able to subscribe alongside.

$20m not £, makes a fair difference.

Secondly these are options so not subscribed yet, will depend on the SP end of Feb.

My word when Coringa gets the greenlight we are going to see 100p in the blink of an eye.

Yes the blame lies squarely at FM's feet for either misleading investors or being so very out of his depth that he was misleading himself - the picture we were given and presented with was a far rosier one than what the actual reality however some of the long term holders, including myself, were far too dismissive of any questioning of FMs ability to take the company forward. Even if it was just from instinct or intuition those calling for FM to go much earlier called it right.

BAT share price up 60% today, incredible share price turnaround. Now up 285% this week alone with a mcap catching up with TGR's.

Fabulous for the optionality it offers and hopefully allows BAT to become a long term TGR holder as always planned.

The investment case here is completely centred around Craig. He's managed to take over from someone that perpetually missed targets and overpromised and present himself in such a way that not a single investor in here is even questioning the possibility that he himself fails to deliver these targets, the 4300mtv - 4500mtV next year, much higher numbers 2025 onwards, the repairs within budget, cost savings operationally and administratively etc

It takes one hell of a ceo to overwhelmingly win over a group of negative shareholders like this - so very impressive.

So so so eager to latch onto any possible negative. Take the recent price action.

40p goes to 60p, then falls back to 50p - as soon as it starts falling he'll rush on here and say something like 'back to the 30s'.

At 50p it holds and then goes to 75p, but as it starts to pull back he'll rush on with another 'here we go, downward spiral continues, will be back at 40p soon once traders are done.

It falls back but holds at 60p, where we are, and starts to show support and head towards 70p. No obvious negatives to offer about the share price so something else is searched for, this time being lack of director buys, another day it will be something else.

It's just so tedious and devoid of useful substance and will nearly always get a reaction from one or two posters which makes either a positive bb or quiet bb turn juvenile and argumentative.

Yeah, I mentioned that the modelling was a highly conservative one based on the midpoint of V price between Oct and Nov this year. So not worst case scenario but not a million miles off either and more likely we’ll see V recover somewhat over that time period.

One of the best bits was the implication that there’s a hell of a lot more he can get out of the two plants than the 4300-4500mtV he's guiding for next year. So there is growth still to be had but stability and foundations come first.

Certainly not leaving shareholders in the dark about anything.

My question asked how long BMN could cope with such depressed prices as we are currently seeing. What Craig said was that they modelled for 2024 using the midpoint between October and November's prices, hence not quite as low as the current state of play (because November V fell further) but close enough to get a picture from a very conservative view. The modelling showed that there would still be positive ebitda and in terms of survival there is no risk, debt repayments can be easily met into 2026. Not enough however to fund the entire capex for 2024 therefore I took that to imply further funding would be necessary given that scenario, albeit probably modest.

V is the all important factor here clearly. He both admitted that if V were to go lower then the above wouldn't necessarily be true (negative ebitda and possibly struggle to make those debt repayments?) as well as how quickly the outlook would improve with even a $5 increase in average sales price.

Got no problem with that, will leave no grey area re whether they should be or not with such insider information and will be paying well over a pound a share. Win/win for us.

A tweet that should please you tomorrowtoday, BAT share price really kicking on hence opening up further funding opportunities down the road:

https://twitter.com/BatteryMinerals/status/1734777570691055629

My question re Fortune, I asked directly to get a sense of their working relationship. Non existent.

Craig's a breath of fresh air, smart, direct, transparent, thorough - incredibly frustrating he wasn't brought in earlier.

Yeah Ben I have ~$175m for 2022 so sounds about right.

Worth asking a question shortly at the investor meet, Craig is very transparent on this stuff... $140m-$150m total costs should be possible assuming rand remains weak long term so if we end up at ~$150m with 4400mtV production break even would be below $35/kgV - that's the hope.

Not next year though, lots of one-off high capex repairs and maintenance planned for 2024.

That's not how you work it out, it's simple if you just take total costs in millions and work out what $1.5m is as a percentage of that total.

$1.5m is evidently not a reduction in costs of 7-8%!