RE: Interesting23 Apr 2019 17:04
gc, you do raise some valid points, but I would also suggest that with some of what you list, there can be a logical counter argument to challenge,....GL S.
1) 5p gate - Spot on and I would suggest BM does concede this point and has also provided some substantive reasoning.
2) Project funding - I just don’t get the anxiety point, a project/asset of this type clearly needs a number of options and what BM and the team have demonstrated on numerous occasions, is that they have the relevant connections to progress assets into production, you can see a very real and recent example of that with Avanco, which was a combination of debt, royalty stream and equity, which then subsequently went on to be sold to Oz for circa $400m and the comparisons to Jangada should not be overlooked in my opinion.
3) Quality of asset - Again I don’t see this as a question, or indeed in any doubt, the PEA in 2018, with the BFS in 2019 should firmly address any questions around the quality or viability of the asset/assets, what has been released to the market to date, is overwhelming in underlining the project economics and how robust they are.
4) Why did AA sell, I think the explanation that BM has provided in regards to being in the right place at the right time, does stack up, there are numerous cases of the majors disposing of assets that are not considered tier 1, over a number of years and certainly when the sector experiences down turns, quite often they will be moved of the balance sheet at knock down prices, I would also suggest that AA probably underestimated the global scale of carbon neutral policies and also the uptake of electrification in place of ICE and also in support of EV and ES to compliment renewables.
5) Palladium pricing, I think to date they have taken a conservative approach to element pricing that they have utilised in the economic models, Palladium is currently 40% higher than what was utilised in the PEA, I would also suggest that the disconnect from supply and demand of carbon neutral elements, has been woefully inaccurate to date and I would suggest is still significantly underestimated.
6) SP Angel - Again I struggle to see this point, surely any recovery rate has to be based upon project and asset specifics and can’t be generalised, it is also notable in the last circa 5 years, that recovery technology has made great strides and I would expect Jangada will follow a dry separation process, which in itself squares away any wet tailings, but is also considered the most effective in regards to element recovery.