The latest Investing Matters Podcast with Jean Roche, Co-Manager of Schroder UK Mid Cap Investment Trust has just been released. Listen here.
"I think its a bit odd that PREM cant get Dorfner Anzaplan GmbH or Geolabs Global Pty Ltd to sign of a new proper report on the recent studies that its 6.5% grade which PREM can produce.
Mr Roach is really just cherry picking in todays RNS, give us firm audited lab reports."
Can you explain what you mean here? You appear to be casting aspersions that the two independent tests of material being at SC6.5, over the target SC6, are somehow not fitting with your agenda. Can you explain how these tests don't sit well with you?
Sounds like more fabricated FUD to me, Mr 14 posts.
That's the second time an RNS has been missed by this site recently for Prem. I wonder why? Are they not filing them properly?
Looked positive to me, SC6.5 confirmed with both lab processed material and plant processed material. Worth noting that this plant test was also prior to the magnetic separation and, being earlier in the summer, prior to the UV sorter optimising and installation.
No doubt the usual rabid green box clan will soon be manufacturing FUD again soon.
I see it going nowhere fast as a good thing, up until production of SC6 starts at 1,000T and upwards, PCM, then it will take off. It certainly feels like the SP is being manipulated to keep it going slightly up, slightly down, rinse and repeat, with set ceilings though. 40/42 or 41/43, it's barely budged all day.
"Marcus - Unless you find the entry from the annual accounts in which it shows $15 million of sales from RHA over the years, I think it is you who is providing very misleading information"
Says bloke who quite clearly said RHA never produced anything, when it produced over 1,200 metric tonnes of a very valuable concentrate, which was worth over £12,000 a tonne last year.
You add nothing. Plonk. goodbye.
Jag, do you get paid to spout lies and negative stuff about this share, or do you do it for fun?
If you won't stick to fact, you'll go on the filter list too.
I don't mind criticism of a share, but lies and misleading negative propaganda are where I draw the line on being part of the debate. You've been caught out doing both of these.
"Marcus - I’m not sure if that was said in jest. 1000 tonne production since 2015. So 8 years to produce a 1000 tonnes of product. Di you actually think that is good delivery? Maybe that’s why you are not concerned about all the delays at Zulu. For you if Zulu produces 1000 tonne of sc6 by 2031 you’ll consider it a success."
No, you lied and said it never produced. I just picked up on your clear and blatant lie. It only operated for 3 years as market price dropped on the concentrate. Even at that time, it was over £12,000 a metric tonne, so the mine had produced well over £15,000,000 of product in a 3 year period.
This is a lot smaller operation, but that mill has barely been used at that level and is in very good order.
It's a big bugger.
https://twitter.com/Premafrimin/status/1693910102263153101
RHA never operated?
"Total production from the RHA Mine was 1,247.65 tonnes of wolframite concentrate, containing 65% WO3.".
The mine ran recently from 2015 to 2018 and the RHA mill was recently refurbed, so is in very good condition.
Jesus H. Desperate now.
"with no clear detailed explanation as to why the plant is still failing..."
Watcher, are you a bit dim, being deliberately obtrusive or just lying for the sake of it?
We ALL know the EDS mill supplied by Stark is not fit for purpose and it's this holding production back. We also ALL know the RHA mill which will be used as a temporary measure, is now on site and Stark are aiming to get the new mill in by the end of the year.
It's these sort of lies and deliberately misleading posts which get people on to my filter list.
See ya. You add nothing to the debate but lies and misleading assumptions.
It's on filter for me now, along with a few others who are clearly just here to spread negative lies and guesswork assumptions, in an effort to lower the SP. It's boring and adds nothing factual or of substance to the debate.