Member Info for mogwhy

gug - the $50m revenue number is from my previous post. $46m from tungsten concentrate plus $4.2m from tin.
Agree that the company numbers are all over the place, which is why I prefer to work them out myself using current prices.
Ebitda is a bit harder to pin down at this stage as we don't know the exact opex achieved and probably won't until we get to full production. So I've used the $110/mtu number from my previous post which is only relevent at 100% production rates.
So opex is 110 x 200 tonnes x 100 (to get mtu) = $2.2m per month or $26.4m pa.
Subtract that from revenue to get ebitda.
Note that the opex includes a $12 contingency.
MM stated in a previous interview that he had "line of sight" on $100/mtu opex, although it wasn't clear if that included the tin credit or not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2fW9tgC-7k

Regarding the revenue comments from MM, it could be that he's trying to understate in order to manage expectations. He will be well aware of his failures to deliver in the past and this is one of the reasons for the low share price.
To confirm what I thought regarding the $36m revenue comment, in a recent interview here, https://tinyurl.com/rkter4l
he confirms that the $36m in revenue and $20m ebitda is based on the FID. He also confirms current APT price of $240.
So I stand by my total revenue calculation of over $50m per year at 100% production at current prices. That's around $23m of ebitda if the opex target is hit.

gug - rather than rely on a comment made by MM in an interview, I find it's best to do my own research and revenue calculations.
Page 12 in the Financial Investment Decision
https://tinyurl.com/ybft5ec5
quotes the 80% of APT price as the product sale price received. This has since been confirmed by MM.
The FID page 4 states that the opex is $94/mtu but this includes a tin credit of $16. I prefer to work on an opex of $110 (94+16) and work out the tin revenue seperately. This is even more important now that we know the tin recovery is a lot higher than was expected.
So with APT at $240 we get 200 tonnes x 100 (to get mtu) x 240 x 80% = $3.84m of tungsten concentrate revenue per month or $46m per year.
Tin 52% concentrate production at 40 tonnes per month gives another $350,000 per month revenue or $4.2m per year.
I suspect that MM's comment of $3m per month revenue was lifted from the FID where the WO3 production is assumed to be less than 200 tonnes per month.
Best to DYOR. The new Spanish investors will have and must be happy that they will see a profit on their 0.36p investment.
Also, don't forget that MM recently converted £200k of his own money from a loan into shares.

Byron was a NED and an advisor to MM. Wres wasn't his main job.
https://portjacksonpartners.com.au/our-people/byron-pirola/

I think that placing premium is the largest I've ever seen.
It's a huge endoresment and the new investors must be confident in the project.
They will have had access to the most recent data available.

Thanks Boythorpe. Do you mean a total of 60 tonnes for this month ?

gug - La Parrilla production rate should now be at or near 80% of design capacity according to MM here at 4 mins in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT1wPbsUssU
So that's about 160 tonnes per month which would generate $3.4m in revenue per month.
A consolidated loan over 10 years at 4% would see interest payments of under $200k per month. So far we haven't been given any opex for Regua. Capex is €1.5m.

The Caja Rural loan has been fully paid off as per the last RNS.
It is expected that the debts will be consolidated into a lower cost loan in the near future.
Wres get paid about 80% of the APT price - so 0.8 x $240

goingunderground - there are no spot prices available for APT.
APT free on board price in China is indicated here at $240/mtu
https://price.metal.com/Tungsten-Cobalt-Antimony

Westh1 - APT price in both Europe and China has been stable for the last 2 months at around $240 - $245. Tin is $16,900.
If we shortly get confirmation that we are producing at 80% capacity, that will give us monthly revenue of $3.4m.

It would be reasonable to assume that the current events will have strengthened Wolfram Bergbau's resolve to have a secure non-Chinese supply of tungsten concentrate. They have in the past, been quoted as saying they would take everything we could produce.
We also know that the US wants a non-Chinese supply.
We haven't yet made any shipments to our US customer but I assume that's down to the previous low rate of production.
So it seems to me that we won't have any problem with selling our product, even if the world economy turns down.
Data out of China last week indicates that the cost of Chinese APT production has fallen from $280/mtu (Shard report July 2019) to $220. This indicates that the high cost producers have been forced out of the market over the last 18 months.
With the sub $200 prices last year due to the Fanya overhang now removed, it would appear that the current $240/mtu price is now the new price floor. It remains to be seen how the reduced supply versus demand plays out in the short term. What is clear is that stocks have been wound down due to the freeze in China. This may see a short term price increase in the coming weeks until the supply chain gets moving again.
For those of you invested, the long term picture hasn't changed. Within a few weeks we should get confirmation that we are producing at a profitable level with willing customers. Within a few months we should get the €5.3m grant hopefully followed by a low cost debt consolidation. Before the end of the year we will have 2 tungsten mines and a gold trial mining operation.
Don't lose sight of the end game. Those with reasonable price targets will see them achieved.

There was a typo in my post yesterday. Revenue should have been USD not £.

If we take 80% of design capacity as the minimum production output from April onwards, then using the current commodity prices of $240 for APT and $16,986 for tin, we can easily calculate the revenue generated.
The revenue comes to $3.4m per month.
To calculate the EBITDA, I'm assuming all the opex is fixed at $110/mtu to be conservative. The FID uses opex of $94 but assumes a tin credit of $16. I prefer to work out the actual tin revenue. The FID also includes a $12 contingency.
So at 80% we will be generating about $1.2m of EBITDA per month.
Then in a few months time we can start to add in the revenue from Regua.

The troll doesn't seem to be able to grasp the difference between facts and future financial projections.
Events which may or may not happen in the future are not facts.
If the projections become true then they become facts at that point in time and not before.
It's the same with "full production is one day closer". Jaf would have us believe that this is a variable. The day on which full production occurs is one day in the future.
That date is fixed. It's a fact that we don't know when that date is.
It's a "known unknown".
But every day that passes takes us one day closer to that date.

You obviously don't understand what extrapolation means.
My numbers are generated from what "may" happen if certain conditions are met.

Just to be clear, when I say the opex is fixed, I mean fixed as though we were producing 200 tonnes per month, regardless of the actual output.

If we take 80% of design capacity as the minimum production output from April onwards, then using the current commodity prices of $240 for APT and $16,986 for tin, we can easily calculate the revenue generated.
The revenue comes to £3.4m per month.
To calculate the EBITDA, I'm assuming all the opex is fixed at $110/mtu to be conservative. The FID uses opex of $94 but assumes a tin credit of $16. I prefer to work out the actual tin revenue. The FID also includes a $12 contingency.
So at 80% we will be generating about $1.2m of EBITDA per month.
Then in a few months time we can start to add in the revenue from Regua.
Remember, the troll wouldn't be wasting its time here unless it could see a profit at the end.

Thanks GIT.
I don't consider finance costs to be part of the equation when looking at operational level expenses. Iberian Resources will be profitable at around 100 tonnes per month but W Resources won't be.

Investors will know what the difference is between "break even at the operational level" and "break even at the topco level" and why the difference between them is important to know.
Trolls won't.

GIT - can you point me to where MM made this 80% statement. I don't recall it.

Using an APT price of $240 and tin price of $16,967 we need to produce 100 tonnes of tungsten concentrate and 25 tonnes of tin concentrate per month to break even at the operational level.
That's less than 50% of the design capacity.
If there are opex savings to be had on reduced output below 100% then those numbers are reduced a bit. I'm not convinced there's much to be saved, maybe a bit of reduced power consumption, but I don't think it'll make much difference.
I'll be looking for company guidance on the run rate for production going into April and I'll be disappointed if it's not over 100 tonnes.