Member Info for Mumbles2021

Why do you bother, go back to bed and annoy the wife

lets be honest, if Rockefeller and Marcus Samuel had the same outlook, we'd all still be in the steam age!!

Charles, I don't understand the need for the LCM study in the first place. I certainly don't understand it being given to a company with an interest in the how the finding of the study are reported. the LCM suggested model is motivated totally by self interest. this is not criticism, all power to their elbow. LCM are trying to capture margin from all the way up the supply chain, instead of the end user margin which is where they are now. They are very good at self promotion, and have a very large voice for their size. LCM seem to have captured a narrative.

Why would Pensana need to get involved in this. The Pensana business model captures the margins all the way from the mine to the end user with an integrated supply chain. this has worked in the oil industry since the end go the 19th century with vertically integrated supply chains.

LCM are trying to force companies further downstream from them to reduce their margins, in order that theirs is increased, all without LCM making any investment further downstream, then by regulating the price at every stage to ensure a higher margin for the magnet producer. Considering the shareholders have a considerable Indian influenced am not surprised as it has worked well in India, where government regulated pricing has ensured that large profits have accrued to those with the most political influence.

I am not saying the PM may grow organically, im saying it has to for as you say demand growth and import substitution.

Fantastic imagination. Unless you believe the west is going to abandon the free market model that has worked so well for it. Albeit with some ups and downs, but that is what the market is. The market is there and is growing. On wind power alone the CAGR is approximately 10% on a Europe wide capacity of 465s TWh (UK 65, Germany 125). Currently the requirements for NdPR works out at about 200 kg per 1 MW. Installation of Wind generating capacity is expected to exceed another 100 GW in the next 5 years. This will require an additional 4,000 MT of NdPr jut to service this requirement, without the increase in EV, VW’s expected requirement on its own is expected to exceed an another 4,000 MT’s p.a. This is additional requirement, in addition to the West strategic policy of import substitution of the Chinese supply. It has been well established that their is insufficient capacity outside China to satisfy the expected demand, as well as the import substitution. Never in history, in a new market has the requirement for a guaranteed offtake been required if the demand can be seen. In established mature markets with limited growth potential (ie petroleum production), offtake guarantees are essential, this is completely different

China, if DPs motives we altruistic such as saving the planet from exploitation from unscrupulous capitalists, i could have some respect for him. As it is, his sole purpose appears to be to artificially depress the share price for his own or others own benefit. He wont be the first, and wont be the last. But it has to be recognised for what it is. Pensana have already stated categorically that they will be adopting the principles of the ICMM (International council on mining and metals) in their operations. To quote from the ICCM environmental statement

“Securing fair access to these shared resources increasingly depends on demonstrating responsible stewardship and recognising the needs of others. Failure to effectively manage the potential adverse impacts of mining on these shared resources can result in the deterioration of environmental resources and have adverse consequences for human health. ICMM members commit to the responsible stewardship of environmental resources, balancing the needs of communities, conservation interests and the requirements of other stakeholders. In short, they commit to be part of the solution to climate change.”

Due to actions of individual/groups with their own ulterior motives, grouped together with the historical SP curve for a typical mining company. The fundamentals and consequent ultimate Market CAP haven’t changed.

Tornadotony, Theorist, there is no need to give DP any oxygen. His motives are clear. One of the advantages of the Longonjo deposit is that it is low in Uranium and Thorium compared to deposits in other geological locations. This was emphasised in the initial ASX presentation by Rift Valley resources in 2016.

That is not to say they are non existent, as it is a characteristic of monzanite deposits in which almost all Rare earths are found. This isnt a new discovery. It has just been disregarded previously when mins have been developed, with disastrous effects on the environment. The IAEA has published several documents in respect of thorium in rare earth extraction and how to handle it safely. It’s not a new or insurmountable problem. Unlike DP i dont make authoritive statements without being able to back up my statements. The only reference he has ever posted was a reference to comment no 70 made against an FT article, by an anonymous poster,

Longonjo is no different to any other developing mine . The European Commission carried out a study using RBWs Sonjwe as an example. This study is entitled “Early-stage assessment could help cut production impacts of rare earth elements” where” “The LCA considered eight different types of environmental impact: acidification of soil and water; ecotoxicity; eutrophication; global warming; particulates that can negatively affect human heath; human toxicity specifically relating to cancer; human toxicity (non-cancer); and smog.”

The study concluded that all these adverse environmental impacts can reduced. Of interest to the Sonjwe development is that a major contributor to the advantages of Sonjwe as sustainable resource is the availability of Hydroelectric power. All the above applies equally to the Longonjo development.

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/research/newsalert/pdf/early_stage_assessment_production_impacts_rare_earth_elements_537na2_en.pdf

The days of the developing countries resources being exploited with no regard for the environment are long gone, before any operations are permitted to commence, an environmental impact assessment has to be carried out, where by the immediate and future impact of the operation on the environment is assessed. Angola is no different. Before the mining license was issued, the EIA was carried out. All this is stated in the various announcement included in the archives of the Pensana Website

Below are the various links to support my argument, may be DP would like to support his own statements with similar

https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20161206/pdf/43dhy2sp5r4bwv.pdf
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1512_web.pdf
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TE-1892web.pdf

Only from a shareholder perspective. quite impressed with Talaxis. why would they invest millions, without being at the top of the payment waterfall. But i do believe that shareholders who have invested in Mkango believing the value lies in the Rare earths have been mislead.

As for radioactivity, the UK Health and Safety Executive have been assured that there will be no Radionucleides. they don't just take one line on a letter, and say that's OK then, off you go. And as i have said to you before, if their is, and the first shipment come in. the management will have far more serious problems to deal with such as personal liberty. To be honest, i believe that have far more credibility than yourself.

But you do care where the profits go, as that is where the share value comes from. Mkango is only one

DP Claude Dauphin (passed now) CEO of Trafigura flew to Ivory coast to sort meet the president to sort the Probo Koala issue out. was jailed without trial and spent the next 3 months in Jail. Wasn't released until Trafigura had agreed and actually paid $190 million. At the moment RBW have an issue with the mining license. Trafigura is a huge company, many multiples the size of RBW. there are no sacred cows. You could be correct on the reasons you give for the visit, but don't be under any illusion that it must be to sign a beneficial agreement. it could be any number of reasons.

You obviously don't participate much in the real world. Talaxis may be minority shareholder (just) in Mkango, but they hold 49% of Lancaster exploration which owns the SONGWE license, this will increase to 75% when they fund the development, .
Making Mkango the minority shareholder in this particular asset.

as stated in Mkango RNS on JAN 4th

"Following the issuance of the Shares to Talaxis pursuant to the amended Warrant and taking into account the warrant exercise below, Talaxis will increase its ownership of Mkango from 14,285,715 shares to 15,285,715 shares post-Warrant exercise, representing an increase from 10.7% to 11.3% of the issued and outstanding shares. Talaxis maintains its 49% ownership in the Songwe Hill Rare Earths Project (the “Project”) and its option to acquire a further 26% interest in the Project by arranging financing for project development including funding the equity component thereof."

i guess you will be able to look forward to the margins from the other assets in Mkango portfolio, as the majority of the NdPr will go to Talaxis..

I guess they could, but unlikely. Sovereign wealth funds are established to safe a country's wealth for the benefit of future generations. Consequently they tend to be risk averse. But still makes sense to invest in their own economy, for the sake of diversification and boosting employment. Also if there is any Transfer pricing games played, they will also share in the upside as 23-25% of the upside accrues to them

Trading houses have a totally different view. They need to ensure that they continue to have competitively priced material to put into the market. They are very keen on taking minority stakes in companies that are desperate for cash flow. Depending on how desperate the target company is, dictates how generous the terms are. Talexis have had this or fingers in Mkango for years. I have to give them considerable credit for their vision, but as a shareholder I would want to know how much of the total available margin will actually fall into the SH pockets

Pricing mechanisms, exclusive off take contracts, transfer pricing, etc, etc,. I know of one company that had 10% shareholding, and 100% of the off take. They have to pay for it, and it does guarantee cash flow, but if the pricing mechanism has a 5% discount against market price then that is 5% that goes directly in their pocket and not the other shareholders. Believe me, when i say this used to be my life. Of course it might not be, but ill bet you a bottle of 2018 Chateau Lafite Rothschild Bordeaux that I'm not wrong

Currently Talaxis own 49%, but have an option to buy a further 26% in return for funding the project. to me that looks like debt for equity and considerable dilution
https://www.mkango.ca/news/mkango-announces-shareholder-approval-for-talaxis-transaction/

DP, if i was a shareholder in MKA, i would want to know. Trading houses, are very happy for others to share the risk and the funding, whilst they extract the all upside. a great business model, if you are the trader.

Morning DP, the Talaxis / MKA arrangement has always intrigued me. I will be very surprised if Talaxis/Noble invested in MKA without something in return other than a proportionate share of any dividends or for Market cap appreciation. They are a trading company and will normally only make an investment such as this to make a margin on the production. I would be interested to know what the offtake contract terms are, whether Talaxis have an exclusivity. ie where the margin between the mine and the proposed processing plant will end up. With Pensana’s proposal, all this is know, it goes to the shareholders over the complete supply chain.

Maybe i should ask the question on the MKA board

There were only 2 actual trades of 50K, the 2nd 2 of the six, were reversals of the first 2 trades. Only the 3rd 2 were trades that count.

Encouraging that the government is actually encouraging innovation, but the grant to LCM needs putting into perspective. LCM are one of 27 companies awarded, all of whom are sharing from a pot of £17,000,000 . Encouraging for the future, but in the context of the Pensana project, not material.

Encouraging that the government is actually encouraging innovation, but the grant to LCM needs putting into perspective. LCM are one of 27 companies awarded, all of whom are sharing from a pot of £17,000,000 . Encouraging for the future, but in the context of the Pensana project, not material.

China, if that is the case, then please accept my apologies. however, i admit, i do try to put myself in others shoes to try and work out where the thinking is coming from.

Usual fat fingers, apologies, last sentence should read profit share, not just a processsing fee.