The information on this Website is not reliable and not intended to provide tax, legal, or investment advice. Nothing contained on the Website shall be considered a recommendation, solicitation, or offer to buy or sell a security to any person in any jurisdiction.
CEO.CA members discuss high-risk penny stocks which can lose their entire value. Only risk what you can afford to lose.
@PamplonaTrader@CriticalInvestor higher grade portion of the deposit is 50Mt @ 0.12% Co and 0.86% Ni vs ICP copper grades at around 0.73%, if I recall. Nickel is almost double the price of copper. Also, Ardea has scale, unlike $ECS. I think Ardea's KNP should compare favorably to $CLQ.AX's Syerston.
@Mr.Smokey@CriticalInvestor$ECS is not 'barely economic'. When I check in the 2015 PEA for current Co prices, the IRR is around 34% and the post-tax 8.5%-NPV around 200M. Thats not super great, but it is clearly very economic. Plus it is in North America and could start production relatively soon, both factors make it all the more likely that it really gets into production. That said, the current valuation already takes all this into account for the most part, imo.
@Mr.Smokey@CriticalInvestor You are right in that it is not easy to follow the numbers in the $ECS PEA. Just today I stumbled over this sentence in the PEA for $CLQ.AX "The cobalt industry is primarily set up to produce chemicals (rather than metal) for use in a range of applications, including for the production of cathode precursors for lithium ion batteries. As such, while cobalt sulphate sometimes attracts a premium over the LMB cobalt metal price, the premium, if it exists, has in recent years been relatively low." So the 20% bonus for CoSO4 over the metal that ECS thinks they will get, might not really be there. Or is CLQ.AX underestimating their revenue? I don't know. But if EVs and storage really take off, then the demand increase will be specific to the sulphates, so a premium will be justified, I guess.
@CriticalInvestor@Mr.Smokey Good find, might be that CLQ is downplaying this premium to create doubt on competitors as well, but being conservative on something not that transparent is a good thing too in my view.
@CriticalInvestorWhen I hear lithium in Mexico I Always refer to Bacanora, it is clay based and has a huge recovery issue it seems as I don't see pilot tests on that roasting method they need. I read a thing or two on clay too with Alset
@Brandon@CriticalInvestor: lab turnaround depends a lot on jurisdiction, generally how busy they are, and the type of test. I can't comment on @Allan's specifics because I know little about $ION and lithium brines, but I've seen some pretty long turnaround times for results when samples have to be shipped far, cross borders, and require special testing. You certainly can't apply an average industry turnaround time to a specific situation.
@CriticalInvestor@Brandon Regarding those assays: you know I don't mean situations that you are in the middle of a jungle in LatAm. Would you assign that situation to testing from this part of Mexico? Aren't we talking since October last year or something? It is a legitimate question
@CriticalInvestor@Allan This is not material, just global process information like management discloses all the time, specified by the month or so, sometimes with causes of delay if relevant/not harmful