Member Info for Mumbles2021

China. Ive been quiet, but don’t remember trashing Pensana, or down ramping anything. I know I’m hurting a lot at the moment and just biding my time hopping for some positive news, appreciate there hasn’t been anything negative and that the immediate cash flow concerns have been alleviated. Do remember saying that the design capacity for Saltend is already fully spoken for from the Longonjo deposit . So didn’t see how 3rd party product could add any value, compared to Pensana mine to end user fully supply chain model. Would be canabalising our margins inorder to enhance another’s. Ie there getting a free ride, on our investment Also commented looking forward to seeing the final design capacity when the feed is completed. If the design as for 50% greater than 12,500 MTs then why not treat RBWs product. But it needs to be a product share, not just a processing fee.

You certainly did

Tornado, with the current design capacity, and Angola resources which can easily supply the required feedstock for many many years. I dont see the advantage in substituting Longonjo concentrate where the margins are captured through the whole supply chain, with additional volumes just for the processing fee.. I’m looking forward to seeing the final plans, which may make sense to add additional capacity to the 12500 MT original design. The marginal cost per Metric ton for processing over and above the original cost will be much lower and could make sense. Lots to look forward to, me thinks

DP, you are correct that most African countries have more political risk than developed nations. Not entirely sure that South Africa has none, not with their Guptas experience and previous political leaders. They have a far more developed economy, but that is not the same thing. I have spent the last 20 years working in West Africa, in most, the politely risk is acceptable enough to consider investing and risking capital.
A considerable amount of the worlds resources are concentrated on this continent. The whole world need resources to continue functioning, African countries have few means to support a rapidly growing population. Contrary to popular belief, the majority of these countries have very intelligent and well educated technocrats supporting their elected governments who do care if things work or not. They need these investments and in most cases welcome and support investors. With the proviso that they are good guests in their country

When calculating NPV’s a significant allowance is made for the political risk in the discount factor. I would hope that anyone investing in an African mining venture will have some sense of geopolitics and gone into it with their eyes wide open,

DP regarding the small tax take. Angola SWF has a 23% stake in PENSANA. Giving them 25% royalties on Angola revenue and then the largest share of the profits derived from the end user price. With full transparency on the margins from mine to Saltend factory gate You do make a very valid point though. There are two other RE miners, one with an established trading house as a major shareholder, who cant boast the same. In their cases, i would agree that the host countries need to ensure they get a fair share of the potential profits to be made by the companies exploiting their resources.

For clarity, the tax will be based on the Pensana Angola operation revenue as based on the established transfer price. I believe in a previous post you alluded to a number of about 20% of the final product price. Which my maths makes about 4%

DP I've found your FT comment, its in the comments in this article published in the FT 0n the 25th January. https://www.ft.com/content/80961cbe-53ee-4a9b-86dc-00b7ac7b79c2#comments-anchor apologies to those who can't get through the pay wall.

it is buried 1/2 way down in the 72 comments, from an anonymous contributor who called himself Minerologigist. i guess you knew it was there (is it you?) . Doesn't seem to state any sources for the data contained therein.

regarding the DFS, for the basket price. it is in the Pensana website in the archives. I found it, I'm sure you can f you look hard enough. I'm done trying to make an argument for some one who obviously has an agenda other than trying to establish the facts.

Apologies, wrong thread!!!! Happy Father’s Day

Price: 119.00
No Opinion
RE: SharesToday 10:15
DP in response to the concerns regarding Radionucleides,. Pensana response to the queries raised during the Saltend planning process was that there would be none.it is possible they were being less than truthful, but that is extremely unlikely and potentially extremely prejudicial to the authors career prospects, and potentially freedom if that was the case . I’m sure the controls by the Health and safety executive will be extremely diligent on this aspects. I have included a link of Pensanas response https://newplanningaccess.eastriding.gov.uk/newplanningaccess/files/9D737F06AE49BB1AB834F1C53A1853AF/pdf/21_00153_CM-RESPONSE_FROM_APPLICANT_REGARDING_GROUNDS_OF_OBJECTION_AND_CONCERNS_RAISED-3965794.pdf

DP in response to the concerns regarding Radionucleides,. Pensana response to the queries raised during the Saltend planning process was that there would be none.it is possible they were being less than truthful, but that is extremely unlikely and potentially extremely prejudicial to the authors career prospects, and potentially freedom if that was the case . I’m sure the controls by the Health and safety executive will be extremely diligent on this aspects. I have included a link of Pensanas response https://newplanningaccess.eastriding.gov.uk/newplanningaccess/files/9D737F06AE49BB1AB834F1C53A1853AF/pdf/21_00153_CM-RESPONSE_FROM_APPLICANT_REGARDING_GROUNDS_OF_OBJECTION_AND_CONCERNS_RAISED-3965794.pdf

They are not claiming $44,000 for the basket price on the index date (30th March 2021). That is the calculated value by The business plan from the revenue and production. appears to be calculated over 10 years, to arrive at the NPV. The numbers stated, being the average between the present and the end of the period. $44,000 is the average basket over the period.

if you take the base price basket at $27,000 and allow for a CAGR of 8%, by year 5, you arrive at a basket of $44,000, by year 10, $91,000. At todays price, that base price would be approximately $22,000. Obviously a lot of the above is speculation. and i wish there was a little more detail

DP, the numbers aren't given but the calculation is indexed on Shanghai Metals for 31st March 2021, was current when the BP was published

You hit a sore point after a pretty rough ride on another forum by a moron. I've just had an overnight for a small procedure hence would have dug it out sooner. It's in the archives on the Pensana website. There's a very compressive set of data in there. I intend to do the same.

Sorry Charles_H, to Dumbpunter, who to be fair, seems to be more aggrieved at some postings on the RBW forum, so posting on a tit for tat basis on PRE.

Re baskets prices. The average price in the BP for 125KT over 5 years, is $44,000/MT. Whether that is exactly represent or not I haven’t worked out independently or (rest assured i will be doing), but it definitely isn’t the price of NdPR. The difference is I have confidence not only in BOD, but also in the LSE who vet any RNS before allowing publications. Fundamentals such as NPV need to be justified.

Your motives are now obvious. Others disagree

How do you work that out. If you are an RE miner only, then i agree with you. But if you are selling the final product, the price achieved and revenue is derived from volume and of the finished product.

The NPV is priced the margin from the final selling price. As Pensana is a full supply chain, the the NPV is based on the margin secured from the final selling price at Saltend not Angola minus the production costs in Angola

The CAPEX and the OPEX is all in the BP, the final selling price is currently based on SMM exchange prices. The fiscal terms for Angola are in the mining license. These royalties and taxes are based on the Angola prices, which may or may not be 20% of the final selling. Which was a very good reason for the Angolan Soverieign wealth funding investing heavily. As they can participate In the margins from mine to end product

for understood, read understated

Thank you Charles for your own thoughts. ill put my response down in more detail later, but please can you confirm that you believe that the your NPV of $1B is realistic, based on reducing Pensana's production and consequent revenue from 12,500 MT to 8,682 MT p.a. , with a price based on todays spot price without any escalation as forecast by in independent analysts . It that is correct then i would probably come up with the same NPV as yourself.

My opinion, is that with a design capacity of 12,500 Mts and a mine that can easily produce the required raw material, then the production quantity is more like to be the constant

i already calculated the Opex the same way as you, and came up with $15 rather than $22, which i agree is an anomaly. but adds $7,000/MT on to the cost base, rather than reducing the revenue by 1/3. Your methodology appears to be disingenuous

however, the NPV and OPEX is calculated over 10 years but the stated revenue only over 5 with an expected escalation in the price, in which the 2nd 5 years will have a higher revenue than the first 5. I don't have time to look into the details, today. but from what i seen of the BP and the behaviour of the BOD. i see know reason t change my own view of the companies valuation or where i expect the company to be worth. for me the stared NPV, is probably (but not definitely) understood. the company valuation certainly is.

Charles, i note that your $1B is based on 2/3 of the design capacity ($8,682), and todays spot price. I assume you are putting the same valuation on your appraisal for Lynas and MP. If you are, i suggest you, i and everyone else sell our stocks in all three of these company today. I will put together a far more detailed critique of your response shortly