Member Info for Mumbles2021

Theo, we'll see. And we are entitled to our won opinions. And this statement you have just made is just that an opinion. You are entitled to it and other can respect it or not However, your previous post was well out of order, it was at best mischievous and at worst malicious . You had no basis to make those statement as though they were fact.

You just confirmed the consequences of the trades last week ie there were more sellers than buyers because of large volume of liquidated collateral positions entering the market all at the same time

MAA86, exactly correct. Theo was very careful to frame his statement as a potential scenario. Not as fact. Another potential scenario could be that all the various parts of the financial structure are going through the final process between all the parties and that the various component of a relatively complex project finance structure (all interdependent on each other) will come together in the next week or so, but that nothing can be said now as it isnt signed off. This hypothesis has as much evidence to back it up as Theo’s………..it could be any scenario in between,, it is a malicious statement, the absolute purest definition of FUD, a statement designed to spread Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt….. Should be used in text books for future students of workings on the stock market….

“Let’s hypothesise that there has been a major setback with the financing. A bank, credit agency or investor has dropped out. The company has not told the market. The market believes committed finance is imminent. Could that fairly be described as tantamount to fraud? What might be the board’s motive for hushing up such a hypothetical setback? Personally I think fraud is an inappropriate term, however I don’t think that at any time in the last three years the market has been informed in a wholly accurate and up to date manner.” Theorist 8th June

It could be the leaveraged shares that were liquidated in July last years, or the leaveraged shares that were liquidated and released on to the market in December, or maybe it was leaveraged shares that liquidated and released on to the market this week and is the reason the SP took another beating in the last few days. You wouldnt know anything about that would you Theo?…. Im sure you wouldnt. Not trying to replace the shares that were sold weeks ago at a higher price as cheap as possible are you?. I try not to reply to your comments on this page, but on this occasion, accusing a board of directors of fraud (and dont hide behind hypothesis to avoid potential litigation against libel, because that is what it is). Let’s be honest this hypothesis has just as much basis in fact as your malicious statement…

Re the above, it could be a hypothesis, but it isnt is it, Theo. You know this statement has absolutely zero evidence to back it up. And you are absolutely right, if there was a material change from the strategy that was announced in June in last year, and/or the financial update that was published in February this year, then the company would be guilty of withholding information that is material to the share price. But there is nothing published anywhere, there are no rumours (apart from the one you are trying to start) to suggest that your statement has any basis in fact. As far as i am aware and I do follow this share closely, is that there are no suggestions anywhere that any of the parties are any less enthusiastic about their participation to what they were 12 months ago.

Theo, you're bored and decided to throw some raw meat into fray to provoke a reaction.

Doesn't quite work that way Tony. Assuming an EV retails for 30K USD and the dealer is on a healthy 10% margin, then the landed cost included duty is 24.5 K, including 25% duty. Ie China landed cost is a shade under 20K, after new duty of 100%, plus a dealers reduced margin of say 5%, then retail cost is 40 K ish. China EVs apparently have margins in the region of 20%, which they will have to reduce. So they will make 10% . Realistically 100% increase in duty, translates to roughly 30% increase in the retail price. Assuming 1kg of NdPr per 100hp magnet , then the magnet cost for a basic EV won't exceed $200. Out of the total production cost.

I hope so as well, otherwise all those cheap Chinese EVs will be dumped on the European market. Although I guess the anti dumping laws would come into effect then

REeeTech, we may have a common line of thought here. there is a consensus from various parts of the ex China industry that RE prices are going the way that uranium has recently. Despite the recent hiccup, almost all market analysis, including Adamas, and Markets and Markets (published May 2024, ie just now) with a base line 0f 2023, are forecasting a 12.6% CAGR until 2030, assuming a base of $60,000/mT for NdPr Oxide, that's $150,000 in 2030. An extract of the report found here. (im not spending $4000 on the full report although i would love to read it) https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/rare-earth-metals-market-121495310.html?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjw_-GxBhC1ARIsADGgDjv96Lx_Frc8vHyBepSxKqVAzQ0Man_caoLcGLj3uX8ZGNr8P4MbJ5gaAjANEALw_wcB

ReeTech this is a classic example of posting out of context. If the article in the Wall Street Journal is read, it gives a history lesson about how the Chinese came to dominate the Rare Earth Industry, including the quotation "I built my own gallows", by Michell Spencer. He said this in 1998, 26 years ago. The context of the current discussion is how the situation needs to be reversed if security issues are to be avoided, and that it isn't an easy task. BUT THAT IT HAS TO BE DONE.

Through choice Lewis......

ReeTech and all RE companies, including Chinese companies, experienced depressed earnings in Q1 this year due to the depressed price, which dropped below 50K/MT. As of Tuesday this week, the NdPr price is the highest it has been since 10 January. It will be interesting to see where it is on Monday after the May Day break.

Have received confirmation that the loan note extension has been granted. no further details were given, and it will not be published. Not being hidden, the question was asked, and an answer was received. I'm sure if anyone else feels like contacting the company directly, the same answer would be given.

REETECH, That's old news; you know that the price dropped dramatically from the beginning of the Year, having varied from 56,000 on Jan 8th down to 49K in the middle of May. Compared to the quota, China had a surplus of over 6,000 mts last; this year, they are expecting a deficit of slightly less than 1,000 MTs. consequently, the NdPr price has increased to the highest it has been since the beginning of the year. it seems that the magnet manufacturers are stockpiling now as they don't expect the prices to drop less than they are paying now but rather to increase.

Cheap option, you've got to be in it to win it, and this cost less than 15mts of copper at today's prices, with plenty of price upside expected. Obviously very little is know on the CAPEX, OPEX or expected Ciu recovery, but that's the point of rhe extended DD period. 12 months is a significant time period for exclusivity.

Ndpr prices:, and up every week for the last 5 weeks. Might find this interesting https://www.adamasintel.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Adamas-Intelligence-and-Tradium-EU-CRMA_Opportunities-Challenges-Viability-and-Next-Steps-April-2023.pdf

I did raise a question, "If Saltend has a processing of capacity of 40,000 MTs p.a., from which 12,500 of separated Rare earths are obtained. what happens to the balance, 27,500 MT's, does it go to landfill?"

Answer; "it ispredomnantly Gypsum for which their is a market". not a huge income but another revenue stream, inaddition to the lanthanum and Cerium. Together, they will probably pay Saltends wages, and have to be disposed of anyway.

Hi lewis, it should be clear that the 15 million "Bridging loan" is part of the fiancing structure Longonjo, belongs to Ozango limited and is not accessible to PRE. As at Dec 31, 4 million was already spent as you say, as of 27th March 7.5 million is spent. Since last years unfortunate interims. they have raised $10,000, plus received $1,500,000 of tax credits, (which i referred to as 2 million, and was questioned on my honesty previously). So $11.5 million, and had some debts to cover from that.

Other than that I agree with most of every thing you say. As far as i am aware, costs external to Longonjo are on close to a care and maintainace basis, except where PRE also has obligations to the Angolans and Longonjo, as per the existing contract all product ex Longonjo is obligated to PRE, and they are responsbile for markting the product, also some funds are need where PRE have work programs to comply with license obligations for the Coola and Sulima licenses and also to keep the Saltend part of the project warm. i woudnt think these are too high in the big picture. Obvious salaries need to be paid,

DP/SP, I fully support your statement on this

I should also add that loans by South African banks also qualify under the ECIC mandate not just goods, as does finance from other AFRICAN countries. However, South African content requires a minimum of 50%; overall, African content is greater than 70%. https://www.ecic.co.za/products/export-credit-insurance/

Absolutely know I have figured it correctly Theo. And you have answered your own question within your post

Excellent article