Member Info for pickedpeck

OK now that's weird. Yesterday was an easy to understand typo, today's UT figure ess so, and then at 17:06 there was someone doing an O trade at 168. Can you get suckered that badly in the auction?

Fat fingered Bob strikes again.

Depends if you're using oil and gas for power generation or not. If so it would put up operating costs. Fortunately HZM has a deal for hydro power, with a 10 year price guarantee.

Price of coking coal would be more relevant, but that is globally priced and would affect all nickel producers equally.

Coincidental amount of shares in that trade compared to today's announcement. 365,000 trade vs Horizonte Minerals Plc ... announces that application has been made to the London Stock Exchange for 365,000 ordinary shares to be admitted to trading on AIM ... following the exercise of options by option holders. It is expected that Admission will become effective on or around 5 April 2023...

Someone needing the cash super urgently, a short by an option holder, or something else?

It's £76k in one trade. That's a big trade but not a notifiable holding so likely we will never know.

However the possible reason for no market change is that it is an agreed trade off market, ie not through the market makers. The MMs set the bid and offer based on what they see, they may not have seen this trade at all. If you or I sent a buy instruction to your regular broker for a similar amount it would likely be filled by lots of smaller trades and shift the price.

Contrarian, no one cares what you say. You clearly have an agenda, I just hope you got badly burned last time your predictions were 60% off the mark, I'd certainly like to think so.

I genuinely don't understand how you can show yourself here after being so wrong last time

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/03/21/ford-explorer-ev-europe.html

'The EV crossover is part of Ford's plans to transition its European lineup to be entirely electric by 2030'

And

'Those plans include 600,000 EVs a year in Europe by 2026'

At 60kg of Ni per vehicle, 36,000 tons of refined and processed Nickel a year for Ford in Europe alone.

In the scale of financing an actual mine George's wages are at the noise level. If either GROC or Clogau is going to happen then more money will need to be raised. I don't think they are going to manage with half a dozen shovels and a few woks with the handles snapped off. The balance sheets of any of these companies doesn't support large capital investment, whether its GROC, ALBA, or even UKOG.

For a junior miner with no existing operations and not much cash in the bank money can come from several sources.

1. Loan finance. If the Feasibility Study (FS) of the mine is good enough it may demonstrate the mine is an investable asset and allow lenders to provide loans. They can be normal bank loans, or more complex Export Credit Agency loans linked to exports of equipment from a specific country.

2. Equity - The second obvious route is to create a dilutive share issue, exchanging new shares in the business for cash. Again the FS would have to be compelling, and the share price offered to corporate investors better than current market rates.

3. Advanced Production Royalties - Cash may be provided in exchange for a percentage royalty on production from the mine. This can be used for multiple reasons and is often done ahead of the first two options.

4. JV - A development partner buys into the asset as a joint venture. This may be as a junior partner, or even as an overwhelming senior one. If a Junior signs a big JV with a bigger miner it usually means the mine will get built.

5. Options and Warrants - like equity except with geared value. Not the most common route for a junior miner, more often done when a miner is in trouble and needs cash fast.

6. Government Grants - For a nationally important resource some governments invest, knowing they will get not only a royalty equivalent, but also taxes and employment opportunities from the mine opening.

For Greenland GROC may use a combination of all the above. They will need a lot of cash to open a significant mine there. For Wales Alba may only need a relatively small amount of cash, so who knows which route they could take. We could probably have a whip round.

As an example of a junior explorer going from discovery to mine opening, it's worth looking at the Horizonte Minerals RNS time line. At different points they have done all the above to raise money to open a large nickel mine in Brazil.

You may also want to read about and understand the Lassonde Curve which describes the investment, development and value curve of a mineral discovery. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-the-life-cycle-of-a-mineral-discovery/

The money needed to open a large mine dwarfs some of the numbers discussed here. HZM for example have raised over $600m for their first production line alone.

You lot have to be the biggest bunch of wind bags on LSE. For a share (where UT excluded) there have been 4 trades with under £20 of combined value to have 13 posts, all pretty much hyping up the nothing that's happening, is extraordinary.

I'm tempted to dump my shares so I don't keep finding myself checking in on this vacuum chamber quite so often.

If there is literally nothing to comment on, then perhaps no comment is the best option?

Interesting post reproduced from the Glencore board.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/to-buy-or-to-build-the-manda-case-for-glencore/2023/02/21/4f36cfdc-b1aa-11ed-94a0-512954d75716_story.html

I assume it would be a deterrent to a lot of potential acquirers that Glencore have a ten year offtake deal for Araguaia already in the bag too.

A buy back has both positive and negative effects. It's usually described as a means of returning capital to shareholders, so taken as a positive. That's because there are less shares to distribute company profits to. That raises the earnings per share, and in theory the dividend per share. If the company continues to be successful then that should raise the share price by at least the percentage of shares bought and cancelled. The buy back also creates open market buying pressure on a share, directly pushing the price up.

The negative perception is that a share buy back happens when a company has run out of ideas for growth using it's available capital, preferring to give the money back to shareholders.

In the case of Glencore the long term price will be affected by the buy back, and short term the share price is getting support from all the ongoing daily buying. The criticism on use of capital doesn't apply as this is a one off period of unusually large cash generation, they are virtually debt free and still retain the capability to make large acquisitions.

Given the share price is a fraction of a penny, and most people posting here likely earn a decent wage per hour, how many shares could be bought with the time spent generating all these posts? There are three times as many posts as trades today, wouldn't it be better to turn that ratio around? Especially seeing as most of the posts don't seem to add any great insight or knowledge to what's going on with HH, GROC or Clogau.

Five of the seven trades so far are below a hundred quid, so maybe some people are taking this strategy already, putting their money where their mouth is.

Keep posting Ade. There isn't much good comedy on the box these days so your Glen posts are gold dust. Do want to share your sell price with us so we can see 'what you could have won'?

I think the current cycle has barely started. Copper and nickel in particular will go into prolonged shortages for the next few years. Glen have positioned smartly to take advantage.

In the photo book they have just done it shows the furnace outer shell being delivered and installed in the last few weeks, in rainy season. The % complete has also continued to rise since December when the rainy season started. The got the concrete bases, walls, access roads all built before the rainy season started allowing construction to continue through it.

Bear in mind a number of these aircraft will be replacements for their current fleet. The A319, A321 and 777 aircraft they currently operate are all well into the teens average age.
The A320 fleet and 787s they currently operate are interesting. Choosing the A350 over the 787 must be a decision based on operating experience.

Salmonn,

Good response. The only reluctance I have about trucking raw ore is the ESG and production cost impact of doing so. If it comes to that there is even a third option, a relatively low cost crusher and dryer plant in situ with dried kiln ready ore being trucked to either V or A. No point trucking the weight of water about. As you say if we get that far I am sure it will be a nice dilemma to have.

The comments on La Mancha give me hope of staying independent for as long as possible. On ore body expansion HZM have not drilled anything beyond foundation holes for quite some time. I realise they already have ore reserves capable of supporting very long mine lives, even with the large production facilities they have outlined in FS to date. However ore in the ground does have some value to add, I guess it is a question of how much it costs to add the value vs the value itself, and the priority of doing so. So far the strategy of starting first production as top and possibly only priority has been the right one, but as soon as money is coming in then there may be opportunity for multitasking.

Either way, I am sure a few of us that have been here a while will be along for the ride and find out!

PS - Thanks for including Araguaia North in the photobook. The landbank is important and adds to the value perception. It may be worth listing the concessions at some point and which mine development they link to, if any.

If ALL goes to plan top 3 producer, they should pass Anglo American Nickel production with all three mine areas open. As a five year investment, if they don't get bought and are producing over 100kt then annual profit should be a multiple of today's mkt cap.

By then I suspect we would be talking multiple lines everywhere, the long mine lives of all the assets mean production can be increased in parallel without excess fiscal risk. The exploration potential of Araguaia is also huge, there is a lot more nickel in that there valley.

So, as Wasa says, it depends on the timescale of your question.

1 year - First Nickel, A1 in production
2 years - A1 at nameplate, A2 started, V DFS published.
3 years - A2 at nameplate, V started, AN DFS published
4 years A1 & 2 nameplate, extra Araguaia S lines in DFS, V first NI, AN started
5 years A1, A2 in prod, A3 & 4 started, V at nameplate, AN1 First Ni.
7 years - A1,2,3,4, V and AN1 all at nameplate. Debts paid off. Ni $30k + per ton, $2Bn plus annual profit, $10Bn + valuation.

Of course I still think they will get bought before anything beyond Year 2 happens. $1.5-$2Bn sale price some time in year 2. If they miraculously get to 2030 still independent they could be paying out today's valuation as the annual dividend.

Or is that all too optimistic?