Member Info for richam

Calendar Q1-2018, of course, which is Wolf's fiscal 3rd quarter.

Processguy, I am aware of the latest shipment. However, the vessel "La Traviata" left Southampton on 06/01/2018. Accordingly, revenues belong to Q1-2018.

DEBT FREE? Did you even bother to read the numbers? If so, your comprehension of what they mean is ZERO.

2017 data is complete and to my disappointment there has been NO further shipment during the quarter. That leaves deliveries to GTP at 37.8k MTU WO3 in concentrate, an improvement of +36,4% vs. the Q3 period. Tungsten: Deliveries to GTP accounted for ~59% of total tungsten shipments during 3 out of the 4 most recent quarters. In Q3-2017 though, deliveries to GTP accounted for 80%. Consequently, in a "normal" quarter I would expect the total amount of tungsten delivered to be in the vicinity of 64k MTU. However, should GTP once again account for a much larger percentage of overall deliveries (like they did during Q3), the total amount of tungsten delivered during the quarter could be as low as 47,3k MTU. This would be my worst case scenario whereas 64k MTU is my best case scenario. Tin: I assume a modest improvement in the production of tin to 55t tin in concentrate, up from last quarter's 49t. Note: Wolf doesn't tell how much tungsten/tin they SELL during a quarter. They just provide PRODUCTION numbers. With regard to tungsten this is not a problem at all since one can easily account for a 1-2 weeks delay between production and shipment (=sale). The rather small amounts of tin concentrate produced at Hemerdon (ca. 125t per quarter only) mean just a few (ca. 6) shipments during any quarter so we run into timing problems. Since every shipment represent revenues of just about A$0,2M the error shouldn't be too much of a concern though. Prices: The average tungsten price during Q4 was US$ 288 per MTU WO3 in APT, up from Q3's US$ 261 (+10,3%). The average tin price during Q4 was US$ 19.902, down -3,1% from last quarter's US$ 20.533. The result of all this: I expect revenues of between A$ 11,3M (worst case) and A$ 15,3M (best case). Given last quarter's operating costs of A$ 25,3M Wolf will incur another multi million Dollar loss for the quarter for sure.

The cost figure is correct, as it was reported by Wolf. The discount that Wolf has to accept is a real pain in the A and hampers results considerably. Reminder: On 29/07/2016 Wolf reported: "The production of tungsten concentrate has been adversely affected by the very fine nature of the ore and the underperformance of the processing plant. As a result Wolf has not met its contracted supply commitments to major customers (Product Shortfall). In these circumstances, the contract term is automatically extended until the Product Shortfall is supplied and a price reduction is activated. Wolf is currently in discussions with its major customers in relation to the Product Shortfall. Now let's run a few numbers (Q3): Revenues A$ 7,756 ~= US$ 6,13. Tin produced: 49t Avg. tin price: US$ 20.533 WO3 produced: 35.601 MTU WO3 Avg. APT price: $US 261. Assuming 49t tin were shipped during the quarter, tin revenues should have been in the vicinity of 49t * US$ 20.533 * 0,8 (discount for smelter) = $US 0,8M. That leaves revenues of US$ 6,13M (total) - US$ 0,8M (tin) = US$ 5,3M for tungsten. Wolf reported production of 35.601 MTU WO3 in Q3 and 30.966 MTU WO3 in Q2. I apply a minor correction to the numbers in order to account for the delay between production and actual shipment. As a result, I assume SALES of 34.834 MTU WO3 during Q3. Now, by dividing W revenues of US$ 5,3M / 34.834 MTU = US$ 152/MTU. As we know the avg. APT price during Q3 was US$ 261 so the US$ 152 that Wolf receives for its concentrate represents a discount of -42% vs. the price of APT! A "normal" discount would be -20%. Wolf has to get rid of this crippling price reduction as quickly as possible! We definitely deserve an update regarding when Wolf expects this penalty to be lifted. If the penalty was lifted, this would go a long way towards improving financial results!

OK, at one point I had my currency conversion wrong which lead to an underestimation of the discount that Wolf has to accept for its concentrate vs. the price of APT. As a result all numbers remain the same, unfortunately with the exception of expected revenues. They are now revised to A$ 11,3M (+45,9% vs. Q3) in a worst case scenario and A$ 15,3M (+97% vs. Q3) in a best case scenario. Can we have my older post deleted?

Whooow, I just encountered a major flaw in my model. Will report back once I have sorted it out.

2017 data is complete and to my disappointment there has been NO further shipment during the quarter. That leaves deliveries to GTP at 37.8k MTU WO3 in concentrate, an improvement of +36,4% vs. the Q3 period. Tungsten: Deliveries to GTP accounted for ~59% of total tungsten shipments during 3 out of the 4 most recent quarters. In Q3-2017 though, deliveries to GTP accounted for 80%. Consequently, in a "normal" quarter I would expect the total amount of tungsten delivered to be in the vicinity of 64k MTU. However, should GTP once again account for a much larger percentage of overall deliveries (like they did during Q3), the total amount of tungsten delivered during the quarter could be as low as 47,3k MTU. This would be my worst case scenario whereas 64k MTU is my best case scenario. Tin: I assume a modest improvement in the production of tin to 55t tin in concentrate, up from last quarter's 49t. Note: Wolf doesn't tell how much tungsten/tin they SELL during a quarter. They just provide PRODUCTION numbers. With regard to tungsten this is not a problem at all since one can easily account for a 1-2 weeks delay between production and shipment (=sale). The rather small amounts of tin concentrate produced at Hemerdon (ca. 125t per quarter only) mean just a few (ca. 6) shipments during any quarter so we run into timing problems. Since every shipment represent revenues of just about A$0,2M the error shouldn't be too much of a concern though. Prices: The average tungsten price during Q4 was US$ 288 per MTU WO3 in APT, up from Q3's US$ 261 (+10,3%). The average tin price during Q4 was US$ 19.902, down -3,1% from last quarter's US$ 20.533. The result of all this: I expect revenues of between A$ 14,9M (worst case) and A$ 20,2M (best case). Given last quarter's operating costs of A$ 25,3M Wolf will incur another multi million Dollar loss for the quarter.

Oh yeah, that's the ticket! Since you can see reserve or cash flow when walking by. Goodness me.

No, that's just not the case. Only the front end is being shut down and the rest of the plant continues to produce. Since the front end delivers more material than the latter part of the plant can handle they can affort to shut down the front end without lowering output. The refinery simply consumes the excess material that the front end has delivered during the 5 days before. These shutdowns are necessary anyway, otherwise front end material would pile up in white bags all over the place as it was the case last year.

We simply don't know. I believe it is due to the fact that the refinery can't handle 100% of the front end's output. That's why Wolf could afford to shut down the front end on weekends till the end of the year. I further believe that the refinery's performance has been improved such that it can now handle more material but still not 100% of what the front end is able to deliver. This leaves room for further improvment.

The next scheduled front end shutdowns: 27th / 28th January 10th / 11th February 24th / 25th February So much for 24/7.

Processguy, I was not referring to costs per unit but absolute Dollar figures.

As usual, the exact opposite is true. The numbers that I presented are BASED ON FACTS, i.e. reported shipments of product. What's more, all assuptions made were made to the "safe side", reasonable, and well explained. These numbers are a BEST CASE SCENARIO. You'll find Wolf's report will validate it. If you had done your homework you'd know. All the necessary tools have been presenteded to you by processguy and others, yet you fail to make use of them. So once again you'll learn the hard way. Your pie in the sky expectations will be disappointed again and once this happens you'll probably resort to re-issue your ridiculous complaints re market manipulation and such. Comical!

Bottom line: There is no other way than fixing the plant, bringing it close to 100% nameplate output.

Assuming my back-of-the-envelope calculation was going in the right direction... Expenditures (A$) excluding investments during the last 3 quarters amounted to -16,514M, -23,074M and -25,278M, respectively. Tungsten concentrate production during these quarters were 26.484MTU, 30.314MTU and 34.834MTU. Quite obviously, as one would expect, operating costs increase in line with production. Accordingly and barring unforeseen extraordinary items, operating costs should have increased in Q4 over Q3 again. Even if operating costs would have remained the same (perfectly unrealistic!), my best case scenario revenues of A$21,5M would not be enough to offset last quarter's operating costs of 25,3M, let alone to be expected higher costs. Also, as I said, this does not take into account additional costs for investing activities (A$-4,226 during Q3). These considerations clearly expose the Three Stooges' rubbish. Last quarter's production figures fell 66% short of nameplate. At the same time the Three Stooges keep cheering 0.xx% tungsten price movements. Hilarious! Even if my most optimistic scenario of 72kMTU production came true, it would take a tungsten price of USD440 (APT) to offset LAST QUARTER's operating costs!

This is a back-of-the-envelope calculation of what to expect: Assuming one additional shipment of 3 containers to GTP at the end of the year, total deliveries to GTP during Q4 amount to 641kt of 65% concentrate. Contained in these are 41.671 MTU WO3 (in concentrate). The average price of 1 MTU WO3 in APT during Q4 was US$288. The discount of 1 MTU WO3 in concentrate vs. 1 MTU WO3 in APT is roughly 0,8 so Wolf should have collected approx. 288USD/MTU * 0,8 * 41665MTU = US$9,6M from GTP. (during Q3 the discount was 0,85 so my guess should be on the safe side) Most of the time shipments to GTP accounted for ca. 58% of total sales during recent quarters. Assuming the same figure for Q4, total shipments of product should be 72kMTU = 65% of nameplate output (110kMTU per Q at a recovery rate of 63% which is between soft material's 58% and hard rock's 65%). That is a best case scenario IMO since a 58% share figure is rather optimistic and whether or not there was one more shipment during Q4 is uncertain as of today. As a result total revenues should be in the vicinity of US$9,6M/58*100 = US$16,5M = A$21.5M. Please note, GTP's share of total sales can swing wildly from one quarter to another (during Q3 sales to GTP amounted to roughly 80% of total sales) so there is a high level of uncertainty in these revenue numbers. However, deliveries to GTP of 641kt is a plus of 50% vs. Q3's 427,5kt! (Again, assuming another yet unreported 57t shipment before the end of the year). One should note shipments were particularly strong towards December and also during the first half of January. Obviously most recent plant improvements have made quite an impact. Consequently, it is not unreasonable to expect higher production figures in Q1 (but keep in mind there might be one shipment less due to a lower number of business days).

Sure can. But I don't like Brownies. How about a cup of First Flush Darjeeling?

One Tonne of what? 1t of 65% concentrate (that's what Wolf delivers to GTP) = 65MTU WO3.

metric ton = tonne, that is.