Member Info for mogwhy

Don't worry NM - there are some positives to look forward to.

Utility scale (40 MWh+) planned VRFB projects (5 tonnes of V per MWh)

1,000 MWh------ China - Jiangsu TianWan nuclear station (5,000 tonnes)
1,000 MWh------ China - Jiangsu offshore wind integration (5,000 tonnes)
---800 MWh----- China - Ningxia energy storage power station (4,000 tonnes)
---800 MWh----- China - Shijiazhuang (4,000 tonnes)
---500 MWh----- China - Hubei Zaoyang Ph 2 (VRB Energy) (2,500 tonnes)
---500 MWh----- China - Hubei Zaoyang (VRB Energy & Pingfan) (2,500 t)
---500 MWh----- Australia - VRB Energy (2,500 tonnes)
---400 MWh----- China - Dalian (Rongke/UET) stage 2 (2,000 tonnes)
---400 MWh----- China - Yancheng (Shanghai Electric Group) (2,000 tonnes)
---400 MWh----- China - Wuhan (2,000 tonnes)
---400 MWh----- China - Hubei (Pueng/Pingfan/Gaoxin project (2,000 tonnes)
---300 MWh----- Australia - Pangea, Port Augusta (CellCube) (1,500 tonnes)
---200 MWh----- China - VRB Energy project TBA H1 2021 (1,000 tonnes)
---180 MWh-----Bushveld Minerals self generation project (900 tonnes)
-----60 MWh----- China - Hongyanhe, Dalian (Rongke) (300 tonnes)
-----51 MWh-----Japan - Abira Town Hokkaido (Sumitomo Elec) (255 tonnes)
-----40 MWh----- China - Tuoshan, Dalian (Rongke) (200 tonnes)
-----40 MWh----- China - Lejia, Dalian (Rongke) (200 tonnes)
-------?------------ China - VRB Energy / Hanloon Energy power station

One off total of 37,855 tonnes of vanadium required (over next 1-3 years ?)
Global vanadium production in 2020 - 114,000 tonnes

Thank you V1per

faramog also seems to think that Duferco is an investment company. In fact they are a family owned steel and shipping business run by Bruno Bolfo with $12 billion revenues.
A $6.5m investment in BMN will not be one of their priorities.
Everyone should go and read Lindons post at 10:31.

faramog won't be able to read this and is obviously unable to read an RNS but everyone else should know the facts.
The RNS on 18 December 2020 stated that the Duferco shares were expected to be admitted on 24 December 2020. There is no mention of a lock in period.
The RNS with the TR1 on 2 Feb 2021 clearly states that the threshold was crossed on 24 December 2020 showing that Duferco sold on the very first day that they got their shares.
Have a look at the trading volumes around this period.

My post about a potential Vametco strike has been taken down but the facts are out there in social media.
There is currently a movement amongst Vametco workers to organise industrial action. So far 30 workers have shown support.

It would be very convenient for Duferco if there was to be a strike at Vametco to get the share price down just before they get issued with $6.5m worth of shares.

Sorry Pickler, my bad.

Come on Pickler, read the last RNS.

"the remaining US$6.5 million being converted into Bushveld shares"

Pdub - the several million shares that GSA have sold is small fry compared to the 65m that Duferco will shortly receive and potentially sell. That's what I find potentially tiresome.
It's all very well looking on the bright side, but I prefer to balance up the risk/reward by looking at potential downsides as well.

Pigpen70 - the 6 month lock in wasn't a requirement on the previous conversion as far as we know. If it was, then it was ignored on the very first day they received their shares.
The conversion next month is being renegotiated so we don't know if there will be a lock in or not.

Apparently Duferco are building a $180m steel plant in Italy with a $72m loan so they had a need for cash earlier this year which would explain the sell off.
Now seems likely they will sell their new holding next month. Hope I'm wrong.

After further reflection, I now tend to think that Duferco sold their entire 37m shares earlier this year.
I think this because at the time they received their shares, they also received $6.28m in cash. It seems unlikely that the EHL share purchase by Grafton was more than the cash element so there would be no need to sell down the BMN shares to fund it.
Whether they needed cash for something else or they just didn't want to be a BMN shareholder is something we'll probably never know.

Pickler/James0309 - we don't know if Duferco sold their entire shareholding because the second TR1 took them below the 3% threshold for reporting.
The funds required to purchase the stake in EHL was an unknown amount so we don't know if the 2m sale was enough to cover it. It seems unlikely to me.

If they held some back to do what you suggest then that makes some sense of the current low share price. The GSA short doesn't make a big difference imo.

DBB - I realise that, but it creates uncertainty in the market if folks think that they might sell down again. Many will take the view that history will repeat itself. A $6.5m overhang will not make for a happy xmas.

Pickler - go and read carefully the 2 RNS's that were issued on 2nd Feb 2021.
Duferco started selling down on the same day that they were issued the shares ie 24th December.

The latest C1 cash cost figures work out to $23.75 across both operations.
I've given C2 cost as $10.4 at the current exchange rate to give an overall group cost of $34.2 per mtV.
That means that BMN are still a loss making operation until they can further reduce costs or increase production.
I appreciate that the C2 cost is a guestimate but it's based on previous data and shouldn't be too far out.

Pdub - my responses.
“They will almost certainly need to raise cash to see the expansion plans through despite FM saying they were funded.....”.
They won't be able to continue with the expansion plans if the company runs out of cash at bank, hence why FM has said he needs to strengthen the balance sheet.

“It will be shareholders who have bought their own shareholdings that will pay the price in dilution and share price destruction... “
This was in response to Alfacomp who said that FM doesn't gamble. I agreed and said it was the shareholders who would (and are) suffering.

“There's no real increase in production in the near term and the scope for reducing fixed costs is limited.
All explained by the company. Expansion plans for Vanchem won't be realised until end of 2022. FM has said that the fixed costs target reduction of $2.5m to $4m is for 2022. That only equates to around $1 per kgV.

Pdub - not once have I mentioned a fund raise.
When I originally pointed out that it was FMs intention to strengthen the balance sheet, I asked how it could be done.
Someone suggested an asset sale, which for me would be the preferred option.

I'm not wedded to a fund raise - FM is, as previously stated.
I agree with you about V prices rising. I've posted my list of VRFB projects many times showing the future extra requirement.
The planned worldwide infrastructure investment is also in the future.
That doesn't help BMN in the short term.
For me, I don't like the uncertainty that exists between now and the end of 2022.

Vanadium price is not drifting up. It's down 25% in Q3.
The scale doesn't kick in fully until kiln 3 is running at 100% which we've been told is end of 2022. So there is no near term cash generation unless V prices turn.
It appears that this is why BMN are currently unloved as they are at the mercy of the V price.

faramog - FM has already stated that a near term objective is to strengthen the balance sheet.
At current V prices they are making a loss.
ARCs $8.5m cash at end of year assumes a realised price of $36 which at the moment looks unachievable.
The expansion costs might be ringfenced but that doesn't help the cash burn.
We have to face it that BMN is currently a loss making miner with a $54m debt. The share price trajectory says the market doesn't like it.

Agree with all of that Lindon, except battery assembly might be nearer than you think.

The Bushveld Energy 250 MWh pipeline includes the 180 MWh for the self generation project and the overall pipeline was a 3 to 5 year target at this time last year as confirmed by the company to me.
The 3 to 5 year target probably still stands with the slippage in the electrolyte plant construction and mini-grid delay.