Member Info for Laverda

1 Direct production costs: This includes all the direct costs associated with mining, such as labor, fuel, energy, and materials.

2. Corporate G&A (General and Administrative) expenses: This includes all the indirect costs associated with running the company, such as salaries, legal fees, and other administrative expenses.

3. Exploration and evaluation costs: This includes all the costs associated with exploring for new mineral deposits and evaluating their potential value.

4. Capital expenditures for sustaining operations: This includes all the capital expenditures necessary to maintain the existing mining operations, such as equipment replacement and maintenance, mine site restoration, and waste disposal.

By adding up all these costs and dividing by the total ounces of gold produced, we get the AISC per ounce of gold. The AISC metric provides a more comprehensive measure of the total cost of producing gold compared to traditional cash cost metrics, as it includes all the costs associated with mining, including sustaining capital expenditures and exploration costs.

BFD AISC is just the standard, it is listed as Opex AISC in Kodals February presentation.

However I agree, the lesser standards can be significantly less per tonne than AISC as it includes everything bar Corporation Tax. So it is worth referring to.

Exactly Acores.

Depending upon where he settles with nameplate tonnage and as you perfectly explained the price of spodumene and associated tax amounts the Opex can be calculated accurately.

It may be well under 600 dollars, but only Kodal can produce those figures at the time.

Ivenoidea it loses money?

Please provide your costings per tonne as Kodal has not issued any on this spodumene price.

The estimated costs were based on a spodumene price of 2,080 dollars per tonne. The lower the Spodumene price the lower the costs.

If the export permit completes, material exported, resource upgrade released and at any point along that timeline an offer is made to it would be for 49% of KMUK which includes no consideration of share price in an offer.

Plus if you are not in, you missed out if they suspend the share.

They just dropped the spread by 8%, about time it needs to be lower again..

Ivroche that is what Bernard said yes.

Yesterday he also hinted that stage 2 will probably be funded by the second offtake when the 50m tonne or whatever tonnage is a jorc.

Painless I am agreeing with you.

Highlighting that taxation will also be less.

I think Bernard over estimated transport he said and hopefully larger less frequent shipping is cheaper too.

If the plant exceeds the tonnage in the calculations then the fixed cost element of opex will be lower per tonne too.

That is why he isn't declaring nameplate as the calculations NPV, NAV everything run off those.

Lithium prices are slightly above Bernard's original prediction.

Based on those this is on track.

Humster agreed in 2023.

Painless put simply if one tax was 5% and Spodumene was 1,080 dollars that would be 50 dollars less tax per tonne to pay.

Therefore if all other costs remain the same the Spodumene opex cost per tonne would be 597 dollars per tonne.

Painless exactly therefore the non corporation tax elements, are based on receiving spodumene payment of 2,080 dollars per tonne. However Spodumene is not that value it will be less than 647 dollars per tonne cost to mine.

Problem is we don't know how much less, because if it is the same as gold it is a sliding scale.

The percentage increases for gold the higher the gold price.

Painless - Feb 2025 presentation DMS stage 1 figures.

WolfA, lol, picked up the lingo.

My favourite city absolutely love the place.

Some areas change at night, a bit dusk till dawn but overall fantastic.

Great people.

Lived there a short while.

Painless the mining taxes are still to pay.

On gold they are a sliding scale.

Painless the tax won't be liable until sold. It hasn't been transported either.

However some of that tax was a percentage of 2,080 dollars per tonne. Spodumene is less than half that.

Complicated as we don't have all the detail.

Painless the Opex was based on 2,080 dollars per tonne and includes everything except corporation tax.

Also it was based on a tonnage, fixed costs will be divided over the tonnage.

So when they announce a nameplate tonnage the calculations can be run again.

This time with real prices of spodumene and real costs rather than budgeted costs.

If it all was the same tonnage and the same costs the Opex would be lower due to lower lithium costs.

We just aren't sure how much, we know gold has a sliding scale, Lithium we don't know.

Ivenoidea, just pass over the adjusted cost per tonne to justify your new deramping statement.

The rest of us simply wait for the adjusted figure from Bernard.

You prefer negative predictions.

BFD you missed the licence wont transfer.

Ivenoidea it is you who is trying to convince people not me.

I am asking where you got the adjusted cost per tonne from?

Also how you know the cost per tonne prior to the company announcing the final plant output?

Ivenoidea, what is the cost per tonne?

You don't know the nameplate tonnage settled upon and you don't know the adjusted costs.

Those were based on 2,080 dollars per tonne, so obviously the cost is less than in the presentation.

So how do you know?