Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Put it into another perspective -
Far less than 1% of the company shares have traded over the past 30days, yet price per share is down over 20% during the same time. I don't get the big swing, but am fully confident that once the price starts surging upward the benefits to us all will be far greater...
I try and stay realistic with my "projections" on what I think Nio might be worth. For a while now I've kind of had that $13 as my minimum value if sold tomorrow.
If we end up building and controlling this project, my thoughts are we could easily be ~6.6billlion market cap, or roughly $30 per share, depending on dilution and assuming the NB/SC are selling as expected. Much higher than that and I think you have to consider CBMM had an estimated value in the 13billion range a few years ago. The overall size of the ore body is a huge curiosity as well, and will only send the value of this project higher.
Of course I'm essentially counting my chicks before they hatch - but still fun to think about it! I'd love to hear counter arguments from those who think I've over or undervalued???
Good Luck - Go Big Red
$13.00US x 216million share = 2.8 billion. I'd say that'd be a minimum starting offer that factors in the 900million startup...
I know far less about the workings of equity financing. Do they essentially create more shares in exchange for cash - and how do they determine how many and at what price?
Can't wait for the FS and ensuing activity once released...
Some news regarding dewatering of the mine. Progress continues...
http://kwbe.com/featured-news/nemaha-county-offers-support-for-niocorps-de-watering-idea/
Yup - snagged about 4k as well...
I see the last couple days about 80k on the buy side at .60. I think we are close to the next upswing when the volume pops again...
Good days ahead!
That was the most definitive answer/info we've heard yet on the FS study. I'd love some great news as an Xmas present, otherwise this spring is shaping up to be fantastic...
I don't try to over analyze ever little detail, although I did like that we are "currently in negotiations" with both scandium and niobium offtakes. Lots of different ways he could have said that but "negotiations" is much more reassuring vs. just talking to some interested parties...
Good stuff any way you slice it...
Google- "Warren Buffett on derivatives". He's made plenty of comments on how they are a ticking time bomb...
That's exactly where I was headed with that. It seems we'd have a huge advantage and leverage to be the first player in the game producing on a large scale, rather than the 2nd, 3rd or later. Even squeezing out some fringe players if all the demand wasn't there at the beginning...
I've looked into Bloom a little - do you happen to know what kind of agreements or how much Scandium they've contracted from Sumi? I found it very interesting Colin Powell sits on their board, and NioCorp relationships could prove very beneficial...
We are the largest prospective mine, but are any others past Feasability or into construction?
Not that I'm worried - just highly curious who might get the first offtakes and where will they come from. If I recall correctly there are 3 Australian mines in the talks, but all 3 together will only produce a little more than ours IF they end up being built as well...
Does anyone have input on who or where the first mine will be that'll be producing Scandium, at least on a much larger scale than what's output today?
NioCorp could potentially be online in 2018, but is anyone further along? I'm curious as to if the big players who can buy Scandium are waiting to see who'll be 1st and at what price it'll go for. Off takes would obviously be huge if secured...
Maybe some additional information will come out at the Rodman & Renshaw conference.
Looks like NioCorp is scheduled to present on Sept 13 at 210pm Eastern...
Webcast;
http://www.wsw.com/webcast/rrshq26/register.aspx?conf=rrshq26&page=niobf&url=http://www.wsw.com/webcast/rrshq26/niobf/index.aspx
I bet Kim Jong-Haircut parties like a rockstar...
Mark last estimated a potential valuation "north of 4billion" based on another sale.
Would that valuation include or would we have to discount the ~900million startup/operating expense?
Well if Propjoe is correct where he believes the company would be sold - you're looking at $10/share being a sale of ~2.2billion US dollars. $30/share being a 6.6billion sale. Based on rough estimate napkin math of approx 220million fully diluted shares. Let's hear some sound off on what a potential sale might be worth?????
The second route is NioCorp taking this thing to full production. Beginning of 2018 we'd all fully hope we're in the middle of construction, but most likely short of actual mine production and generating revenue. Share price at that time is anyone's guess? Whats the actual demand on the Scandium, any price changes of the 3 metals, etc...
A month or so ago Mr Sims clarified to this board that not all permits surrounding the entire project need to be in place to start construction. The way I understand this is that the heart of the operation (the mine) can begin with construction as far as the Corps is concerned...
If someone sees or reads that differently - please expand... Any engineers???
Sounds like great news to me...
That's a very interesting article Stark. We've talked about those companies before - but it basically points to the world going from anywhere from 5-20 tonnes of yearly Scandium to 200+ if Nio and the Australian mines all go into production...
I'm glad none of them have off-takes (at least that I know of), but sure would be nice to see even a modest one on our end. It would be huge to see 1 company commit to the entire current global supply (~20 tonnes) and confirm to the rest of the world that Scandium is the real deal...
Only bids from this guy have been BUY! Lucky enough the last few days to pick some up around the .65US mark... I'm not familiar with the whole pump and dump scam but why does 11k traded shares (out of 170ish million) affect price at all? Volume last few days has been very sluggish...
Wow - interesting analogy Putz. Unless NioCorp posts information or or documents in a PR it should be considered garbage? What's the point of even having this board then (some even cleverly calling it a discussion board)? I should just check their website or google for press releases for all future information? Relax and let posts stand for what they are - respectfully asking for clarification or follow up would go a lot further to helping this board than the petty bickering that's been going on lately..
SMH
Does anyone know much about the Rodman and Renshaw Conference coming up in Sept? Perhaps that's the next opportunity for some news which could tie into the presentation - completion of pilots, off takes, etc...
Release of the FS by year end would be great. Right now it feels like financing and construction starting early 2017 would be ambitious, but I'd be happy to see it! Patiently waiting...
Not an expert at all but once you get 6ft or more down isn't avg temp underground in the upper 60s? The whole reason houses/buildings utilize geothermal lines going down 200-300ft? Wonder how "warm" they're talking...
Overall good story though - sounds like progress...
Is that correct on 9500 gallons? That's not much at all. An 18x36 backyard pool will have 20,000 gallons... Must be a typo - no way they'd build an underground pipe to empty a pool...
Serious question-
Do you really think the 6 people who debated permits on this board are what caused a small downward fluctuation in price today? Just want to be clear - maybe I'm missing something here...
Yes - I do recall those references. I suppose I'm wondering if the Inferred resources are are the same as what's been described as the mine being "open at depth, and likely to the north and south".
The Inferred numbers in the PEA put tangible numbers to it - although at lower grades than the Indicated resource.
I'm interpreting it as;
1) Indicated Resources = 4.3bil pretax
2) Inferred Resources = not figured into PEA
3) unknown resources at depth and laterally = my beach front retirement home
I'll search the posts some more, but that's been my curiosity for a while...
Ok, ok, I'll leave the permitting issue alone. I didn't intend to start or flame the fires of a debate, in the end I'm on board regardless of EA or EIS...
Anyways, new topic if anyone has input-
Is there anyone/anywhere that's discussed the differences between the Indicated versus Inferred Resources that the mine contains? Numerous places make references that the Inferred resources aren't used in any of the PEA estimations. Does this mean the 4.3 billion pretax value should actually be roughly 2x higher as the Inferred amount of resource appears to be equally as much as the Indicated amounts???
Sorry the page doesn't cut and paste well, but page 5 of PEA2 is what I'm referencing...
Table 1.5.1: SRK Mineral Resource Statement for Elk Creek, Effective Date April 28, 2015
(1) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. All figures are rounded to reflect the relative accuracy of the estimate and have been used to derive sub-totals, totals and weighted averages. Such calculations inherently involve a degree of rounding and consequently introduce a margin of error. Where these occur, SRK does not consider them to be material. All composites have been capped where appropriate. The Concession is wholly owned by and exploration is operated by NioCorp Developments Ltd.
(2) The reporting standard adopted for the reporting of the MRE uses the terminology, definitions and guidelines given in the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves (May 10, 2014) as required by NI 43-101.
(3) SRK reasonably expects the Project to be amenable to a variety of Underground Mining methods. Using results from initial metallurgical testwork, suitable underground mining and processing costs, and forecast niobium price SRK has reported the Mineral Resource at a cut-off of 0.3% Nb2O5
(4) SRK Completed a site inspection of the deposit by Mr. Martin Pittuck, MSc, CEng, MIMMM, an appropriate “independent qualified person” as this term is defined in NI 43-101.
The Mineral Resource presented has been reported following CIM guidelines. The PEA is preliminary in nature, that it includes a level of engineering precision and assumptions which are currently considered too speculative to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable Mineral Resources to be categorized as Mineral Reserves.
Classification
Cut-off (Nb2O5%)
Tonnage (000’s t)
Grade (Nb2O5%)
Contained Nb2O5 (000’s kg)
Grade (TiO2%)
Contained TiO2 (000’s kg)
Grade (Sc g/t)
Contained Sc (000’s kg)
Indicated Inferred
0.3 0.3
80,500 99,600
0.71 0.56
572,000 558,000
2.68 2.31
2,160,000 2,300,000
72 63
5,800 6,300
Thanks Todd - I appreciate the rational reply. I'm not trying to argue the sky is falling - only saying the permit process isn't a done deal. The way I understand it is the EA issued by the USACE will recommend whether or not the EIS is necessary? If that's the case we are only waiting just for this EA to be released- which should be a public document?
My grandparents lived in Syracuse - which if I recall is only 20min from Elk Creek. You don't live that way by chance?
Rhetorical hyperbole? You're either an attorney, or good with a dime-store thesaurus.
How is taking facts out of the PEA2 about a 3-5 year timeline to complete an EIS rhetorical hyperbole?
And thanks for the advice on doing some DD. I've heard all the presentations and read the information. I read the master's thesis in all it's geological glory- yet not understanding 80% of it as an Average-Joe...
In the end I would love nothing more than the FS to be completed Q3, funding in Q4, and mine construction started in Q1. That would be fantastic - but this whole little thing with "permits" is kind of a big deal.
I'm sorry this is only my sixth post - maybe some more YouTube videos and Burt Reynolds Camaro links will up my credibility....
I do respect this board and read everyone's opinions, but sometimes the tin foil hats come out as soon as someone chimes in with something less than 100% unbridled enthusiasm. Except or accept my comments as you wish - if you question my motives or intentions I live less than a couple hours from the mine and would be glad to discuss over a beverage rather than a keyboard...
Cheers to an EA over an EIS!
I missed the whining part. The difference between EA versus EIS is huge... I'm invested just like everyone else here, but blind faith in these "permits" getting passed through doesn't make much sense. Is everyone ready for a 3-5 yr wait if the Corps of Engineers wants the EIS done? There are methods, options, and plans being put into place to avoid it, but at the end of the day it is a major factor...
Maybe it will end up being an EIS and a bunch of people will get bored and sell out - meaning more cheap shares for those ready to ride this thing out or sink with the ship...
PEA2-
"At this time, the design emphasis on limiting impacts to jurisdictional wetlands and waters of the U.S. should result in the use of an Environmental Assessment as opposed to an Environmental Impact Statement as the disclosure document for the USACE analysis of the Project. However, pursuing the option of including a 48 km pipeline and discharge of dewatering water to the Missouri River could trigger additional federal involvement and extend the scope of NEPA to EIS proportions."
I'd say I'm probably more worried about permits vs financing...
There is no shortage of people who want to see this mine succeed for financial reasons - permits are entirely dependent on govt..
I've read the PEA2 several times and it looks like we're waiting to see if we need an Environmental Assessment vs an Environ. Impact Statement.
Pages 247-265
http://niocorp.com/images/ElkCreek_NI43-101_PEA-Updated_241900.030_026_20151016.pdf
The longer more bureaucratic version would be the second EIS, which says 3-5 years to complete. The EA takes 12mos to which all that work and planning should be done as far as I know. My understanding is the Corps of Engineers gives the word on whether the EA or EIS "permit" is needed.
NioCorp appears to have done all in their power to avoid needing an EIS being completed. Their plans all structure around avoiding waterways, wetlands, etc... While at the same time putting plans in place to mitigate and replace any environmental disturbances. Outside engineering firms were used to consult and assist making sure environmental issues were properly addressed.
My reading of it leads me to think the dewatering of the mine, holding ponds, and the 30mile-ish pipeline needed to empty into the Missouri River are the biggest concerns...
If anyone has more clarification - please chime in!
"Permitting" is one of my biggest worries. Anyone from the Omaha area should remember how badly the Corps of Engineers got hammered/blamed after the flooding of the Missouri from Gavin's Point south.
*I'm not a professional in any of these fields - just a guy who has read the material over and over...
Definitely a consideration. At a minimum it's a positive having that guidance to help finance such a large scale project...
First National Omaha is the nation's largest privately owned banking institution - holding 20billion in assets (according to their website).
Not a finance wizard by any means - but FNB execs do hold positions on the NIO board if I remember correctly. The local connection makes the partnership logical...
Coincidentally TDAmeritrade HQ is an hour and a half from Elk Creek, NE. I don't think losing Scottrade is any big loss, just have to have wait out holding periods on opening new accounts...
*1st time poster - but been following you guys for a while now...