Member Info for MadMat

Indeed, looks like our assumptions re the delay were in the right area... however I wasn't expecting this...

"Amur could mine from one much larger pit at Kun-Manie rather than the three previously envisaged"

That's a bit of a game changer - surly one big mine will be much cheaper to operate than 3 small ones?

https://www.proactiveinvestors.co.uk/companies/news/208488/amur-could-mine-from-one-much-larger-pit-at-kun-manie-rather-than-the-three-previously-envisaged-208488.html

a google search like this
"will there be a split in nickel price grade 1"
provides these top 3 results shown below... all of which suggest a split...
basically grade 1 is pulling up the price of grade 2 and grade 2 is pulling down the price of grade 1...
this doesn't really matter if your buying the stuff to use it, but for trading commodities and futures etc it means the market is becoming more and more distorted and for that reason will eventually be split.

https://think.ing.com/snaps/nickel-a-messy-divorce-or-amicable-split-for-demand/
https://www.reuters.com/article/nickel-evs-ahome/rpt-column-why-electric-vehicles-could-fracture-the-nickel-market-andy-home-idUSL5N1QQ5OX
https://www.metalbulletin.com/Article/3806947/FORECAST-EV-nickel-demand-to-surge-tenfold-by-2025-Vale-says.html

mine was the one just before at 3.6,
roll on q1 2019....

jammy git..

I can't see how selecting a variety of trades of similar sizes is basis to determine it Riverfort selling... its a big leap IMO... perhaps not a gigantic leap... but certainly a big one.

Its is also possible they have not sold any of the shares you identified.

If you take the total number shown as issues in your spreadsheet they add up to 11,680,320
4,693,712 05.09.2018
3,495,437 14.09.2018
3,491,171 25.09.2018
total = 11,680,320

With 671,670,000 shares currently in issue someone could hold up to 20,150,100 before hitting the 3% disclosure threshold.

M

ok, but its not uncommon for trades to get booked after the bell. (its happened to some of mine)... so why assume this is Riverfort? We can't correlate with their remaining holding... so whilst it possibly Riverfort... some may say probably Riverfort... its by no means definitely Riverfort.

where did you see that TDT?

According to this site there were no trades yesterday of those volumes

best
M

I like the last bit...
------------
.... we anticipate that the three pits located at IKEN, ISK and KUB may merge into one large pit, covering a strike length of more than four kilometres. This being possible, it could provide substantially greater potential to selectively mine higher grade production earlier in the mine life, resulting in an increase in the tonnes of metal produced by the processing plant."

HI Red, thanks for you reply.

Your understanding of the numbers is far superior to mine. My concern with HZM is really only to do with their choice of terms.
We frequently see common terms in use with a commonly understood meaning. (PEA, PFS, DFS, BFS... and so on).
I know little about mining but I understand the industry is regulated by JORC and NI 43-101 ....
So when I see terms like PFS I expect a study that meets a certain quality standard.
So when I see that a document is not a PREfesibility Study... (as one would expect from a company following the JORC and/or NI 43-101 code..)... but instead its a Project Feasibility Study... I have to wonder why they deviated from established terminology.
For me this undermines the credibility of the report, is it compliant to any standard..? Probably not JORC or NI 43-101 , otherwise they would have named it correctly.
To me it smacks of sales shenanigans... but then perhaps Im reading too much into it.

best
M

I've not studied this but from the brief look I've had it seems to support the opposite view of the FT article... ie HPAL is good but not so good as just digging up sulphates to begin with.

As you say TDT - its anything but certain...

https://www.gigametals.com/site/assets/files/4861/2018-03-19-hpal.pdf

➢ There is no doubt that the dawning of the EV market will significantly benefit nickel (sulphate) producers - it
has for example already significantly lowered by-product unit costs by sharply increasing cobalt prices.
However the revival of interest in HPAL needs to be tempered by the experience of past and present
operations.

➢ 1. HPAL works, but it’s challenging and capital intensity is high. Autoclave pressure averages ~1,600kPa
higher than in POX (+54%), with temperatures +37oC (+17%). Capex averages US$49k/t Ni.

➢ GMR currently forecasts EV demand exceeding 100ktpa in 2022, so still small in a >2Mtpa nickel market.
However strip out the >70% of existing nickel supply which is unsuitable for EVs and it seems increasingly
clear we will see a bifurcation of nickel pricing.

in the absence of big news some kind of update on the pfs and explanation of why its taking so much longer than expected would be nice

If some good solid news does not materialise before the AGM... is suspect it will become a lynching.

Also to note...
In the Investor presentation HZM call it call it a 'Robust Feasibility Study'

http://horizonteminerals.com/news/en_20181029_investor_presentation.pdf

so... all as clear as mud then...

(thanks for reposting the link CBS)

HZM are calling it a 'Project' Feasibility Study,
ie neither the PREliminary Feasibility Study (PFS), or the Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) terms are used..

https://amcconsultants.com/experience/feasibility-studies-for-mining-projects/

What that means - i don't know - although it seems a bit fishy
Why they choose not to follow typical conventions - i don't know
Is their Project Feasibility Study equivalent / better than / worse than a typical PFS or DFS - I don't know...
How do you compare ferronickel against nickle sulphide - you guessed it - I don't know

I certainly hope the AMC SP reacts better when our PREliminary Feasibility Study, is released... that the HZM SP did when they released their Project Feasibility Study
M

Hi Red,

Seems very difficult to make such a comparison, the key pieces of info are widely distributed and also not yet confirmed. I've heard HZM have recently published a PFS but I cant find it. Their most recent investor presentation refers to the PFS in 2016 but since then the resource has doubled.

So with both HZM and AMC we seem to be in the dark when it comes to confirmed (PFS quality +/- 25% ) extraction and processing costs,

Certainly with AMC there are a few big things still unknown, surly making any direct comparison very difficult and inaccurate.
Namely
- The widely varying costs of the road for AMC, somewhere between (150 and 300 mill) and the unknown but yet very low cost of interest to pay for it
- The removal of upfront capex cost for a smelter through the use of a toll smelter, (therefore making smelting opex initially) pushing the capex outlay onto the production phase - greatly reducing risk to a lender and therefore improving terms of a loan
- The RF tax breaks on the first few years of production...

So, with both AMC and HZM I see so many variables and so much scope for change of these variables...
It would be nice if we could compare two PFS documents side by side... but the best I hope for is an RNS summarising the highlights of the PFS.

M

not bad...

some people have nothing better to do... pitiful really

yes.... thanks... !

I take that remark as a reference back to the Jinchuan MOU still being in play.... and the tight lip in line with the NDA

Still hope for my R8 this year

and the reason renewable energy is overtaking nuclear is because is just as cheap and far less risky

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jul/10/nuclear-renewables-are-better-bet-ministers-told

Thanks TDT, yes this is more inline with my expectation ... How did you come by them... ? I'm assuming it was not from AMC.
Interesting to note that in Feb 2007 SRK estimate our value at between 90-110 M USD based on $5.40 / lb nickel price. But by Dec 2007 AMC themselves in the RNS are stating $84 M, based on $7.5 / lb nickel price.
Pretty big drop with no explanation about the disparity with the SRK figures earlier same year.
So we wait with baited breath as the story reaches its conclusion...
- will we see the psf before xmas
- will the numbers be as expected and will this have proportional impact to sp....
- what happens after pfs...
Tune in next week folks for updates on all of the above and more...