George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
If they do submit a positive final research report by 24-May-2024, which I think they will, it could take a long time for ANM to approve that report:
https://brasil61.com/n/codigo-de-mineracao-entidades-criticam-e-parlamentares-se-dividem-sobre-pl-957-2024-mine240725
Good Look
6 weeks from today the research permit ends.
Between now and then they need to submit a positive final research report to ANM.
The GUIA (trial mining) application/grant and the environmental installation licence end with the research permit.
I would expect some news within the next 6 weeks!
Good Look
They could only be referring to the Maximus mine site concession and the tenement immediately to the east of Maximus where the did a lot of sample drilling though never released any finding to the SH. A Final Research Report for that tenement was submitted to AMN Sept 2023.
The key samples noted in the RNS. KMF01, MXBS01, 02, 03 & MXBS04 Global were analysed circa 2016 with the results used to confirm remineraliser minimum specification.
Seem to have got that though when using the term 'Global'. It was KMF01 that should be 'Global', the MXBS... samples were 'Geosol'. Simple mistake to make and only 16,000km between the two?
The 'Historical Work' with the huge disclaimer looks like just grab samples were taken.
Not to worry, sounds like Harvest are doing the same: 'Harvest is presently engaged in sample collection from the same locations within an area known as the Capacete area, as part of its own data verification process.'
More grab samples then?
Well you can't do real research on an area where you don't have a research permit, right?
A classic for a placing, just like the 'Harvest Minerals makes exciting new K2O Discovery at its 100% owned Arapua Project' between 6% and 10% K2O it was?
Took the edge off the disappointing dust sales though, particularly March?
Good Look
Niceto....
You seem to have missed the latest metric Harvest have added to the confusion:
'.....the Company has been paid for....'
What really matters here is revenue and raising an invoice is the closest you'll get to that. There's no point in Harvest raising an invoice if they can't deliver it as it cost Harvest 2% of the sale price (CFEM).
The auditor put an end to Harvest raising an invoice and trying to claim that as revenue without actually delivering it.
They tried that in Dec 2022 when they invoiced 45,522tonnes. The auditor disallowed circa 33kt of that from being claimed as revenue because it had not been delivered.
The product can't leave the site without an invoice and 'boleto' (ticket) to prove CFEM payment.
Getting paid, well have a look at the last RNS, they seem to be doing much better with getting paid.
Good Look
Niceto...
The Q1/23 RNS stated 3,560t invoiced and delivered, but they actually invoiced far more than then 3,560t in Q1/23.
When I stated 'less than 9,000t is disappointing' I'm referring to invoiced only in Q1/24 irrespective of when the orders were placed.
Good Look
Should be earlier.
Last year early April the MD was busy on site discussing ideas to achieve >200kt sales for this year, planting vegetables in Carmo do Paranaiba and looking at other projects (somewhere else).
But if they hang on until end of April I could ......LOL
Good reasoning there Niceto....though invoiced sales are now the main event here. Orders placed may just get the shareholder excited but with Harvest track record with orders placed, who would or who cares...........?
I'll stick to 'not guessing this time' but your 8,000tonnes, invoiced, would be the highest tonnage reported for Q1 so far?
That said, and this is not a guess, I'd say anything less than 9,000tonnes invoiced would be disappointing.
Good Look