Utilico Insights - Jacqueline Broers assesses why Vietnam could be the darling of Asia for investors. Watch the full video here.
>CL said it had over 100 potential sites in Cornwall as future targets
AFAIK they are looking to run off the back of the 'hot rocks' project from years gone by. I have a relation who worked on that as a driller/crane op. According to him hundreds of pilot bores were trial drilled back in the '90s, mainly around Penryn/Falmouth but many more were trialed, dotted all over Cornwall.
Interesting times ahead for CL.
Nice work. Thanks for sharing all the details.
VBR and Techmet. I thought a few weeks ago Mennell might help with this.
Positive steps and a positive influence to CUSN IMO.
ATB LB
Cheers. I said carbonate - I meant sulphate 🤦♀️
In the right place for Ktech then if its at significant levels. Which was kinda my point.
Phal - believed to be low. DFS to confirm
Mosaic - unknown. Initial assays to approximate.
ATB LB
...sorry, forgot to add, K-Tech are fully in the game of extracting radioactive materials using their CIX/CIC technology. They know exactly how to deal with any awkward bi-products. In fact a uranium bi-product could potentially be exploited if it can be successfully removed from the REE stream. I'm not strong on chemistry so I'm not 100% on whether the radioactive elements are present in the carbonate after stage 1 processing, or if they stay with the gypsum stream.
Point is if it's present in any appreciable volume from the Phal or Brazil feed stock this might not actually be a totally bad thing given K-Techs expertise in this field.
One other point that stands out to me is from the penultimate RNS, where it stated :-
'Rainbow has the exclusive rights to use the K-Tech back-end IP for Brazil.'
If it does pan out and the process translates well to NdPr production then additional, similar, opportunities exist in that territory as @SP has highlighted.
ATB LB
@cad
These 2 are flagged 'non protected portfolio - single protected transaction' trades again according to official LSE data. Negotiated off book normally and held back from the trading data as not to spook the bid/ask. Hence the delayed reporting.
I saw a few of these whoppers pop up last month (around 4m total) with the same flags @ more like 14 p
I had a personal theory it was an II or fund getting involved, but a check on Morningstar at the start of this month (when it refreshes its holding data) didn't reveal changes that tallied with July trading theory.
https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/xlon/rbw/ownership
Nice to see some bigger volumes going though.
A bit of negative noise floating about this week from the usual suspects from over the road - however I personally believe we are nudging ever nearer to news out of Phal. Then we can find out once and for all exactly whether this Mintek/KTech process has serious legs and put the speculation to bed. Proof will be if there is economic value in the stage one refinery product. That equals de-risk and a potential interim revenue stream... any further uplift from the Florida process is a bonus IMO.
I'm with others on this. Lab trials worked well. Front end pilot phase should be simple upscaling exercise. PEA was underwritten by a competent person. DFS is en route. This is good solid junior explorer/miner methodology.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but the actual answers will come via the official RNS channels for this process, this feed stock and this company. Parallels whilst interesting are just that.... parallels.
Have a good weekend .
ATB LB
Mining.com via LinkedIn
"How Rainbow Rare Earths plans to bootstrap itself onto the global stage"
http://bitly.ws/PZZh
ATB LB
Thanks for sharing Cadellin. I hope rbw get ahead on this curve and the PP results pan out. Phal DFS probably the catalyst if the results are good.
"If you can innovate and bring solutions to market that produce rare earths efficiently, you have a tremendous market opportunity," said Nathan Picarsic, co-founder of the geopolitical consulting firm Horizon Advisory.
ATB LB
Hopefully a sensible question that might elicit sensible replies.
On the assumption (presumption) eua went fully into survival mode,which I suspect they are already on the road to doing as contingency against a prolonged asset sale/geopolitical situation ...
Has anyone dug through the accounts and attempted to calculate if WK operations alone can sustain the company on a pure Opex vs product sale basis? ie is WK alone potentially cash generative?
Obviously dependant upon successful sale of concentrate or uplift from refining. Plus it depends on a restart of concentrate production rather than pure stripping + stockpiling. **
Such a calculation would give some idea if a raise purely to continue as a going concern was necessary. If it is required then an indication of a timeline could be roughly derived.
I ask because at the agm the Co clearly stated very little further CapEx or expenditure was required or anticipated for the Kola or Urals projects; and a raise was there to keep an option floating for potentially expanding out into a non Russian asset base.
My calcs need refining and checking and are no where near ready to post. Its very hard to calculate accurately and with any level of certainty but just wondered if anyone has already attempted to carried out the exercise.
**Caveat: WK is documented as stripping + stockpiling only to keep cash burn low. Not 100% clear if this includes running through the wash plants and/or results in an additional tonnage of concentrate.
Appreciate any replies. Sensible ones with calculations attached even more so.
ATB LB
Sounds good vii. I'll try and keep the dates free.
I can't remember ever having the opportunity to get a guided tour around one of my investments let alone 2 in one hit. Going to grab this bull by the horns if I can fit it in.
This could be a really good shout so thanks for highlighting it.
ATB LB
@Saint. If you follow the 2 links you will get to the TG forum. Scroll down to the very bottom. 4 posts up is a 93.1kb pdf version. This is the exact file I combed through and verified word for word against my recording.
Should be 11 pages in total. Downloadable and can be saved locally for future reference.
ATB LB
Not sure if this is significant. I've spent a few hours looking at this. Well stabbing about in the dark to be fair! These SEC filing documents are so complicated. Anyway I went off on an accidental tangent and found some interesting documents which may well be the reason for this amended filing.
NB I'm not saying it is for sure - just joining some dots. There may well be other requirements.
If you go to the SEC filing page on the MURF website you get the Edgar landing page... Most here will have seen this.
https://www.sec.gov/edgar/browse/?CIK=1896212
However if you click the white 'filing' box next to the most recent amendment (not the blue document link itself) you get a list of all the filed documents. This white box is actually link to a different web page.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1896212/000149315223025880/0001493152-23-025880-index.htm
In particular look at the 2nd and 3rd files, ex5-1.htm and ex8-1.htm. These appear to be statements from 2 law firms (Sichenzia Ross Ference LLP and Thompson Hine LLP) with very recent submission dates (28th July)
These 2 firms are listed under the 'Legal matters' section of the main S4-A document. Copied below.
- - -
LEGAL MATTERS
Sichenzia Ross Ference LLP will pass upon the validity of the shares of New Conduit common stock to be issued in connection with the Business Combination. The material U.S. federal income tax consequences of the Business Combination will be passed upon for Conduit by Thompson Hine LLP.
- - -
From what I can deduce as a lay reader of this stuff, the 2 consent letters are statements to say that they have reviewed the merger proposal and NasDaq submission are ready to fully support the business combination so long as Murf keeps up their end of the requirements and follows the merger plan. One consent is for the issue of the shares and the other to handle the tax post merger. The also consent for their statements to be included in the filing.
Thoughts anyone?? Looks like a positive step forward.
ATB LB
No probs Paul.
I've finished going through it. It took much longer than I expected. I've cross referenced Dels original question list, Saints bullet points, the transcript (not sure if it was IKNs as he didn't confirm).... All 3 against my recording. Plus listening out for paulb's specific query.
Transcript.
Upshot is that the transcript is super accurate! Other than a few grammatical errors it's a near perfect word-for-word account of what was said. Well it matches my recording and I know for certain the origin of that. Whether you believe / trust me on that that is up to you. I was satisfied and will refer to this document going forward.
It's an impressive piece of work so massive kudos to who ever produced it. AI or not. There are tiny errors but due I believe to interpretation of a lilting Irish accent / dialect. Parties becomes perties for example. After a while you read over it. It's 99.9% accurate and the context/meaning is clear. My source was an 11 page pdf. Certainty nothing was doctored, added or removed.
Dels 20 point list.
I reckon only 2 questions got skipped. I can't tell if other ones from different people were added but the phrasing and order during the agm matches dels list. Again huge kudos to del for submitting them. Shame he got booted out. One of the reasons I've commited some time to this exercise - as a repayment of dels efforts.
Saints bullet points.
Also accurate. No bull or exaggeration. In no way a criticism but a few key points were missed. I believe Saint was writing whilst listening live so fair play. I took the original post in CAPS and annotated it with extra notes and paraphrased the replies. I'm undecided as to whether to post it as it would be my interpretation.
Far better idea is to seek out the transcript. Read it for yourself and assess from there. You'd glean far more from the full text.
In my opinion reading the transcript is a better way to absorb the content of the agm. I learned a couple of bits I'd missed from watching my video by crawling through the transcript.
Just be prepared. It's not all a total ramp. There are parts of it that highlight risk factors. To be fair CS did an admirable job. He didn't appear to skip or dodge and during the second half was fielding live questions on the platform . He had to be on his A game not to let anything slip. Also there are parts that display acknowledgement (finally) that geopolitics are hampering progress and more likely changing the dynamics of their plans. [obviously!]
Takeaway.
It looked and read like CS was genuinely trying to address shareholders concerns whilst working with the bounds of what he could legally disclose. If you obtain the pdf then it's a far easier point of reference as its searchable.
I hope this summary helps people make informed decisions about EUA.
ATB LB
@paulB 18.01
Noted your post.
This needs to be taken in context with the rest of what CS said wrapping up the AGM. I'd urge you to seek out the transcript and read it for your self, and take this in line with the rest of the paragraph and the sentiment CS intended. But to answer your question I've listened to it very carefully and compared to the transcript - the actual verbatim quote is...
"The eruption of the Ukraine crisis has clearly derailed the value creation, and I can't take the blame for that. I didn't start the war, but basically, we must do the best we can....." [it goes on in more detail]
Regarding looking nervous. I took your comment on board too. Yep probably super nervous broadcasting live. He's trying to answer some probing questions without slipping up and accidently letting any cats out of the bag. The nerves start to show when the pre submitted questions are exhausted and he's then answering on the fly. Live questions with no prep and he's having to freestyle. To be clear this is just my assessment.
I'm still reviewing the transcript and the bullet points will post more info later once completed - it's taking longer than anticipated.
ATB LB
Ikn. Think I've got it. Teenagers with tech to the rescue. Came from the daily digest site. 11 page pdf.
Does it start with "to submit your question, click on the arrow to the right of the message box". Looks AI generated. Grammar is a bit off but I get the gist.
If so then this is the one I'll use.
Can you confirm before I start. I only want to do this once. :)
Cheers LB
You're further West than me I believe ? Happy to try and split and compare notes if you're interested. Callington and Plympton are closer for me. Would love to walk round TW.
Trouble might be a business trip around that time that could clash. I maybe overseas :( but should know in the next fortnight.
I'll let you know.
Cheers LB
@Ikn. Me too. I made my own recording of the live stream on the day. Just need the transcript. For what it's worth (it ain't a lot) I'm offering to read thru it and verify it's content and authenticity against my recording.
If I can't find it, worse case I'll verify saints bullet points and fill in any missing blanks.
ATB LB
Interesting link. Have you seen there are guided site visits. Seemingly @£20 a pop? TUN, CUSN, CL etc... all available if I'm reading it right.
I think I'm about then. I may try and register for the Plymouth one.
Would love to walk round all of them to be fair.
ATB LB
It looks like I'm not able to publish or distribute the video/audio without breaching the virtual agm platforms T&Cs. Also disposable email accounts and offshore VPNs aren't really my scene.
On reflection I'm going to shy away from that. Sorry.
I'm happy to read and verify the transcript against my recording as being a good record of what was said if it helps. It would be caveated with "in my opinion" so posters can either take my word for it or not.
Shame really, actually seeing the video would remove a lot of doubt. A picture conveys a thousand words, a movie conveys a million pictures and all that.
I'll see if I can get hold of the transcript.
If I can and get time I'll check it this evening.
I'll also verify @saints list.
ATB LB