Member Info for tomcat-14

it’s ~250year resource life…

will be interesting to see… if and how they can amicably divi it up… in the knowledge that there’s more than enough for everyone…

the cost for a pfs for this scoping study was estimated at $3.3m to undertake… can’t for the life of me understand why bcn didn’t progress with that and show how much sonora was really worth from it’s scalability to an initial 100ktpa…

maybe they thought we can all work it out for ourselves and scale it up from the pfs & dfs for the lil la ventana stage 1 pilot plant… which we can… ;)

i also remember why i use 70ktpa av now too… 69,817tpa lce is the actual figure in table 22.6 of the report…

sensitivity was $333m per $500 change in lce price from the base $6,500/t used…

£21m - £15m = £6m 30% amapa…
(100% £20m)…
(19% £3.8m)…
(51% £10.2m)…

csn mineração is the second largest iron ore exporter in brazil and owns two mines in the country… casa de pedra and engenho… are any of these mines near our mine or railroad…

sorry… i’ve understated the size a little… for some reason 70ktpa always sticks in my mind… but it was actually… capable of producing up to an average of 75,600t lce per annum… there is a sensitivity factor in the actual report itself for the increase in lce costs above the base $6,500/t used… lol…

*priorities…

the scoping study was done 100% on jv areas… 70ktpa… for tesla et al… additional to the lil stage 1 pilot plant that bcn prioritised for china/ganfeng….

isn’t ganfeng’s 50ktpa planned expansion intended for export to china… their deal priories must be focused on retaining these export facilities… with mexico’s domestic requirements being incorporated as an additional capacity… and usa’s on top… which is where our scoping study comes into play…

you’ve seen the sonora scoping study i assume… pretty easy to value our sonora jv from that…

they will probably need the dfs for the 1st two of your options below md… i’m not sure they need it for a conditional offtake with the likes of glencore… although it does sound like they will do the dfs anyway for the project licensing and other reasons… including keeping their options open…

yep… £15m attributed to the book value of our other assets… mcap £19m… leaving £4m currently attributed to the market value of 30% amapa (100% £13m)… makes no sense at all to raise at a £13m market valuation to then buy at a valuation around $110m ($20.7m 19%)… one of the two needs to be corrected to correlate…

and regarding the amapa dfs… with an off take partner… particularly if it’s one that has already purchased amapa iron ore and is happy with the quality of the product… do we actually need a dfs… we are rehabilitating an existing project… that is tried tested and proven already… it was only the port failure that put a stop to the mine and processing operations…

btw… regarding the sonora jv’s… i don’t believe that gangfeng can do a deal that we aren't privy to… we get 1st dabs…

we know you’ll be gutted when it happens md…

that’s exactly the sort of deal i’d like to see them land with an off take partner… and with a $500m deposit it includes +25% worst case +/- accuracy on costs for the $400m capex reported in the pfs… it’s almost a perfect template for amapa… not even almost… it is a perfect template for amapa… lol…

https://www.mining-technology.com/news/csn-mineracao-glencore-iron-ore/ …

yep… we obviously don’t want that to happen here do we… but as i recall… it was us that secured the conditional off take with tesla at sonora… when bcn had completed their pfs… this may need to happen soon for amapa to be fully appreciated by the market… and before our bod go and do something similar… our / amapa’s market position clearly need’s bolstering at this point going forward…

especially if you know who’s who… ;)

unless these discussions are being headed by one or more of the other directors… who haven’t purchased for some reason…

we’ve already been selling the stockpiles to them haven’t we… and from the discussions over the holidays… they seem receptive to conditional deals including pre-payments / deposits that would more than cover the $400m capex… we could even discount the costs relative to the savings for alternative financing in that instance… win - win…