Member Info for observer842

LoL @MLQ. $30-40m...

I agree @Zoom. Fascinating interview with intriguing prospects! Here's the direct link to the 47 minute interview:

"Tesla's Mining Strategy w/ Rodney Hooper" (17 Nov 2020)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyI9nnvHbno
===[
Interview with Rodney Hooper of RK Equity about Tesla's raw materials supply chain strategy. We cover Battery Day announcements, Tesla's plan to get into clay lithium mining, how the EV boom will impact raw material prices (lithium, nickel, graphite and more). I think Tesla's ability to source high quality battery materials is a key competitive advantage. What are your thoughts?
]===

Thanks @Barksy! It's a transcript of the latest interview:

"Cadence Minerals creating a large potential upside for its investors" (November 11)
https://vimeo.com/478022309
===[
Cadence Minerals plc (LON:KDNC) CEO Kira Morzaria joins ************* to discuss its Amapa Project. Kiran gives an overview of the company, provides us with details around the Amapa Project, the shipping of iron ore from existing stockpiles, the strategy, value and directors investment.
]===

Given the recent surge in iron ore prices and other factors, I find it curious that he's still mentioning $30-40m net.

===[
Q3: You’ve mentioned in the past that you’re able to ship iron ore from existing stockpiles, whilst the mine is being recommissioned, how is that progressing?

A3: I think the idea was, originally, we were going to, when we talked about this in December last year, effectively, once we got the bank settlement done, we were going to start shipping material. That was really important because you could ship material, there’s a lot of material there about 1.3 million tonnes, take about 12 months to 18 months to ship it all, possibly sooner, but let’s talk the 12 to 18 months to ship it all. That would have generated $30 to $40 million of net revenue, which could be invested either to repay the bank creditors or of course, and reinvest into the asset, its capital so it had inbuilt equity.
]===

It's almost as if he's keeping the current "idea" under his belt for now. ;-)

Ob

References...

"Amapá Agency participates in the approval of the PANAMAX vessel in the Docks of Santana" (August 31, 2020)
http://ageamapa.ap.gov.br/noticia/3108/agencia-amapa-participa-da-homologacao-de-navio-panamax-nas-docas-de-santana
===[
The new operation will place the port of Amapá in a differentiated position and guarantee competitiveness in the market, as the State leaves the average of operation with ships with a capacity of 45 thousand tons to 70 thousand tons, representing an increase of 40% more cargo a be exported.
]===

"Cdsa Performs Static Traction Tests on Ship Mooring Bollards" (29 September 2020)
http://www.docasdesantana.com.br/index.php/noticias/313-cdsa-realiza-testes-de-tracao-estatica-de-cabecos-de-amarracao-de-navio
===[
On August 22 of this year, a static traction test was carried out to issue a certificate for the BRAMANTIA tug from SAAM TOWAGE at the CDSA port. The test was carried out with cable passed through the piers of pier 01, which can prove a minimum capacity of 62.40 tons of buoyancy that each mooring buoy has, reaching the conclusion that we can offer a capacity of up to 100 tons of buoyancy per buoy in piers 1 and 2. We conclude that with the certification of the BRIGANTIA tugboat, our mooring bollards have full capacity to support mooring of vessels greater than 220 meters in both pier 1 and pier 2, offering a minimum capacity of 62 tons and a maximum of 100 tons .
]===

And don't forget to scroll down to pier 2 which is also capable of 70kt vessels as recently certified @Evan ;-)

https://serveporto.com.br/macapa/

Indeed @Ivybush. I'm hopeful we'll find someone who's keen to take it off our hands for whatever we need to take us to 49% of Amapa. Interest drummed up from the US listing & Czech listing in the next few weeks might just line up nicely with a boost in share price and consequent sale - a pound should do it. :-)))

I know, I know. ;-)

LoL @Bannor: "these boards & what's said hold no sway or influence on shares so what's posted is actually irrelevant at the end of the day ...... unless of course your gullible or daft enough to base your buy/sell decisions on what other anonymous posters say here without duly checking .... derrr & serves you right if so."

My understanding was that initially you believed the first ship was to collect DEV's ore with near certainty, and I too believed it (until evidence to the contrary came along and we both changed our opinions) giving me confidence to buy heavily on the back of this. Had we not both been aligned in this view I wouldn't have bought so much, perhaps not even at all. Additionally, I'd be naive to think aligning of views didn't at least marginally influence some others in their investment decisions. The bottom line is that although you don't like to hear that what you say influences others reading it, it does, due diligence or not... Not a reason to stop posting though as you make a very valuable contribution IMHO - mostly at keeping us grounded! ;-)

Ob.

If Amapa comes good then the BoD have my congratulations for pulling us out of a potentially fatal over-leveraged lithium play which I fully supported and would have blamed no one but myself had I lost my stake. From where I stand they took a gamble on lithium in an attempt to protect and help progress our JV's. Lithium prices plummeted. In hindsight we shouldn't have over-leveraged ourselves on that play as @Bannor warned at the time. Should we now? Is lithium about to boom?

@EyeGuy. I agree with your estimate of a likely EBITDA of around $400m at today's iron ore prices and find it puzzling that the BoD haven't mentioned this in interviews and that none of the analysts seem to have picked up on this. I know they are trying to be conservative and cautionary before the deal is signed, but it's a hell of a difference from the $136m mentioned in RNS's using $61/t! :-))))

Indeed @Bannor. There's wait it out value, and now value. Two different things. If by taking the now value for EMH or Sonora or Yangibana it enables us to go to 49% of Amapa without further dilution that would probably get a big thumbs up from the market reflected in our share price. :-) The now value of our Sonora holding is probably $5-10m IMHO (due to the mine plan being against us), but I'd be surprised if we let it go for anything less than $20m, and I'd hope for $50m if the plans change to 50ktpa - assuming we sold rather it than wait it out/contribute what is required for it to be worth closer to your sale value of $100m, e.g. post construction and producing lithium. And yes, if we'd had our way our 30% JV would have been mined first and it would have had at least a wait it out value of $200m IMHO, even, but alas, it wasn't to be. Same for the estimated value of Yangibana - mine plans are critical to both wait it out value and now value.

Not that I know of @jimb. Also as @tomcat suggests, it's not inconceivable they'll scrap the current plan leading to that 10% being more like 20%, or potentially higher - up to but not exceeding 30%. I personally doubt it. But am prepared for the eventuality! ;-)

Ganfeng committing to the Sonora project is great news for us. It signals the project is likely going ahead.

The current 19 year mine plan ramping to 35ktpa LCE considers 11.95% from the JV area, mostly in later years - which means in terms of NPV value of project, we are looking at less than 3.6% to us - probably more like 2-3% due to the later year discounting.

I'm confident in the coming months (could be days/weeks!) they'll announce an increase of length of project and/or mining rate to greater than 35ktpa (likely 50ktpa) and I expect that 2-3% of project value to KDNC to increase somewhat, perhaps to above 10%. 10% of what though? Going to depend on the lithium prices which I also expect to turn soon. :-)))

So one eye on Sonora and the consequences of 50ktpa (or more!) for us. Presumably both BCN and Ganfeng would prefer we were gone. For what price though? Answers on a postcard! ;-)

Ob.

Wow. Good find @jimb! Very positive indeed!

11.95% to be precise. See page 137-138 of the feasibility study:

Take you pick. ;-)

https://www.cadenceminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bacanora-FS-Technical-Report-25-01-2018.pdf
https://www.bacanoralithium.com/pdfs/Bacanora-FS-Technical-Report-25-01-2018.pdf

See page 138 of the feasibility study:

https://www.cadenceminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bacanora-FS-Technical-Report-25-01-2018.pdf

@Tivman, that is not the case. 12% of the 19 year mine feed comes from the JV area of which KDNC owns 30%, BCN will own 35% and Ganfeng will own 35%. @BBN has already provided the relevant links. I expect that 12% to increase significantly should BCN announce an increased mining rate to 50ktpa (or higher), or/and increased life of mine.

@BBN. I make it 48.2% also - we are talking both stages of the mine though for the first 19 years - stage 1 (17.5ktpa) and 2 (35ktpa). As far as I'm aware KDNC have yet to agree a mining arrangement with BCN. Also, I'm of the opinion that the 35ktpa will likely be increased to 50ktpa as suggested in various interviews at which point KDNC's share of the CapEx might be expected to increased to something like $50m or so, with expected returns of $200m or so - NPV $150m in this very broad finger in the air instance. Shouldn't be hard to arrange that kind of financing for a project that has been given the green light to commence. But unlikely before that point! Alternatively KDNC might be happy to let it go for in the region of $50m if Ganfeng want it for themselves and KDNC could utilise this more effectively elsewhere. ;-)

@BigBiteNow: "It would imply that KDNC are 12% owners of stage 1," It implies KDNC have 30% of that 12% associated with them, which is 3.6% of the current mine plan. I'm expecting the plan to go beyond 35ktpa at which point that 3.6% will almost certainly grow.

Rogue units spotted!

£19.3/t * 30% * 3,057kt = £17.7m