Member Info for HarChris

RAH, Largo's Q1 update was actually released on 18th April and wasn't received all that well (production for Q1 only 20% higher than BMN's, the smallest difference i've ever seen in a quarter). Today's update is the Q1 financial results which I think is the audited and more detailed version that is required four times yearly on the Nasdaq.

Still, the run up into the update is possible a sign of growing interest in the vanadium space.

Clark, coffeecups has speculated re volume and leaks numerous times and on all the other occasions no RNS followed, it's nonsense.

He also spent weeks ridiculing me prior to this update as I spoke of a mutually beneficial relationship between Orion and BMN whilst he claimed we were going to be absolutely taken to the cleaners by them - now, after the fact, it's a 'sit up and take note moment'

Perhaps an occasional Well Done Jason for balance?

:)

Of course it could technically be from any random date this year but it's far more likely to be the figure that they are giving us next month anyway in the full year results and one that is out-of-date enough (and similar to the interims) so as not to be deemed material news.

Plus it aligns with my calculation for Dec 31st and is almost certainly lower than what the figure will be by March 31st so enough reason to be reasonably confident that it is in fact the end of year figure. And is good news.

It isn't dated no and that's why I said it's not confirmed but we know it's from some time after 2022 interims ($7m) and before the Orion restructuring and seeing as it almost perfectly aligns with my figures for the end of year the chances are it is the end of year cash position.

V prices were depressed in H2 but US prices held up relatively well and November and December were record months for shipments to the US hence not overly surprised if the cash figure actually increased between June 30th and Dec 31st.

We are talking incredible margins and cash generation as it is from this quarter onwards, even if basket price were to fall a fair bit from here yet alongside this there's ever growing noise around a graphite shortage and graphite 'doing a lithium'.

We could be in for quite a ride over the next 3 - 6 months.

Squirty, here's the link for you, you can decide for yourself: https://www.weare121.com/121mininginvestment-london/bushveld-minerals/

What is interesting is that the cash figure given is $1.2m higher than the midpoint of my estimate for end of year 2022 and bang on for my debt estimate... if so then I'm fairly confident that the cash figure at this very moment is above $20m.

Yeah and i'm certainly not arguing that gold is a better place for your money than bitcoin, I don't necessarily think it is but I just wish there was more acknowledgement currently that gold is the one acting as a hedge against inflation, gold is the one acting like a safe haven in difficult times, a proper store of value etc - there's an interesting discussion to be had.

Some of the most prominent bitcoin adherents don't do themselves any favours.

I have a question for you, what timescales are fair to use when assessing returns from different assets and is it reasonable to continually change the parameters so the asset you're championing is always appearing to win?

I say this because I've noticed Saylor is continuously doing this. He started out, for example when comparing bitcoin against gold, with all sorts of timescales; 5 year, 1 year, 6 months etc. He then lengthened the timescales to 1 year minimum and now, with gold winning out over both one year and two years he's only going from when Microstrategy first bought bitcoin in August 2020 (or before).

At what point is it plain and simple deception?

It looks like they shared the end of year cash figure today - $10.9m, although not confirmed.

If so that would lead me to think current cash position is at the upper end of my $15m-$30m... very good news!

Most understand that Argo is absolutely hamstrung right now with no ability to expand which in this sector means shrinking. They were in dire need of bitcoin catching a head of steam whilst sentiment had returned earlier in the year and taking advantage to raise as much as possible but that opportunity appears to have passed now.

Those like me on the sidelines are hoping for a Q1 update to at least see whether there's any value to be had at any price but unless it comes in the next week or so we can probably assume the next meaningful update will be the interims in August/September.

Nah not going to have anyone knowledgeable fall for that.

TGR have managed to grow into a 30kt capacity producer with extremely modest dilution since IPO and no debt and are close to becoming EBITDA positive - pretty unbelievable if you ask me.

I agree, there are far, far too many variables such as the current sales mix, what markets the inventory were sold into, whether inventory has continued to be sold in Q2, whether or not some of the Orion CLN debt repayments were paid down between July 1st to today etc etc to provide an accurate answer but my post was to highlight that we can be as near to certain that the cash position is healthy and the decision not to pay off any of the remaining CLN with cash will have been a prudent management one rather than one of necessity.

I think it would be reasonable to give a very wide range of $15m-$30m.

'Accepted HarChris that there has been capital investment that has increased cash outflow in recent past.

Debt repayments also need to be factored into AISC versus vanadium price. The difference is not cream.'

______________________________________-

This is my rough workings, tell me if you see ant discrepancies...

The bulk of debt repayments related to the Orion CLN, which was $35m with ~$10.5m of repayments over three years. One payment of $3.5m had already been paid to Orion and BMN were sat on $7m end of June.

I'm therefore assuming that a total of ~$42m was needing to be repaid to Orion - $4.5m is paid off in shares immediately leaving $37.5m. The loans equate to $40.5m ($27m + $13.5m) which leaves BMN with ~$4m left over after paying off the original CLN.

If they finished 2022 at ~$8m, first add the $4m from above. They then sold ~100mtV of inventory at an average sales price of $41/kg ($4.1m) and generated healthy margins through Q1 into mid April (with margins having fallen slightly since) then we're looking at a cash figure of at least $20m imo and possibly greater than $25m at this present time (best we'll see is March 31st figure in June).

Whatever it is we now know that besides a total collapse in V prices BMN are fully cashed up for the foreseeable future.

No I have acknowledged that it won't be that high, closer to $25m as of today I would say (~$20m end of March 23).

By keeping a healthy cash balance they are able to insulate themselves against any near term weakness in V prices whilst also being in a position to pay off the $27m secured term loan and convert the $13.5m CLN into shares if V steadily rises (os spikes) over the next 6-18 months.

Smart management.

2021 through to the end of 2022 were expansionary periods that also saw production outpace sales, hence a high cash burn.

2023's AISC is significantly lower than previous years (as much as $10/kgV with the dollar where it is) as well as the inventory being sold off in Q1 generating pure cash (rather than excess costs).

31st December figure won't be too dissimilar to the 30th June number but from conversations with management it sounds like we'll get a 31st March cash figure also in the full year results which is going to look far, far healthier.

‘Gemstar, Richken’s twin brother?‘

Yet ANOTHER brand spanking new account with historical knowledge of LSE posters - it’s almost as if they are the same person?

There is absolutely nothing to suggest that China is going to somehow double their production over the coming years - there is currently no primary producers there and I’ve not seen any projects in the pipeline (please direct me to them if you have information). There might be some additional production from stone coal but it’s dirty and also economically unviable unless V is ~$9/lb or above.

I would imagine what we’ll see (and are already seeing) is Russian V being redirected to China to make up the supply gap however that is only going to make the deficit for the rest of the world even greater. New supply will certainly come online Ex China but as far as I’m aware that’s mostly from mid 2024 onwards (and won’t match the more optimistic forecasts for VRFB)

______________

As for the cash figure doing the rounds on here that was me and it was made in error, I’m sorry for that. With the cash generated in Q1 as well as ~100mtV of the inventory sold into the higher prices my estimate for the cash figure is $25m. We’ll get a better idea in the full year results in June.

The recent financing also allows BMN, with their ~800mtV stockpile, to hold off selling during this dip in V prices, convert a fair percentage into higher value electrolyte and sell the rest when the inevitable uptick in V happens later this year.

I use Fast Markets for the US FeV price & Europe FeV and v205 and Asian Metal for China and for a general picture of the current trend. CRU Ryan's Notes would be very useful but I don't have access to that.

With 45%+ sales to the US it's by far the most important price to track and it's also worth noting that Europe is supposedly fracturing into a two tier system now where V with no link to Russia is selling for a premium (and above the reported prices).