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.
Nope. I know when I’m beat, but I’m glad to see others taking the time to dig into the filings instead of just the PR’s! The onion isn’t all that hard to peel with this company.
Your diligence on the SPAC deal has been exemplary and you should be commended by the board for providing this level of detail.
In your opinion, would it be fair to categorize this deal as risk free for the founders and anchor investors? Or more than that, was it guaranteed profit?
I have not done near the amount of research on this deal as you have, but I’ve researched the details of previous deals that NioCorp had made with various parties extensively, most specifically the offtake agreements and various funding agreements.
I can’t think of a single agreement where the counterparty to a Mark Smith deal assumed any risk.
It’s really weird how Madilyn Butler wanted to connect with me on LinkedIn today. She has zero connections on the site but for some reason chose me as her very first connection, even though we’ve never met. Almost as strange as my weekly update that lightwave logic is still searching my name, or the multiple hits from Niocorp, ECRC, IBC, and Sims’ lobbying companies that like to check up on me.
It’s risk free for Stellantis. Why wouldn’t they sign it?
CMC, ThyssenKrupp, and Traxys also signed offtakes with an agreement to promote NioCorp at even higher share prices than this…seven years ago.
I’ve never been a part of an NDA related to this company, so I’m not sure I follow you. Can you explain what you mean by Mark silencing me?
Dumb enough to respond with a link on commercial real estate I guess.
Let us know when Stellantis and Niocorp have a definitive agreement to trade on anything other than sub market value. So far Nb doesn’t have a single offtake agreement that meets that criteria.
The TD Ameritrade rating is an algorithm heavily influenced by analyst predictions.
How many analyst opinions were used in that $13 target? Just old Heiko with HC Wainwright, correct?
It starts from the June 6th official Phase 1 date application according to the NR, but it’s just an estimate. It will be interesting to see what EXIM thinks of them submitting costs from 2019 estimates and a FS that doesn’t include REE’s. I can’t wait to see the application!
I shucked my pretty red dress. Come on, Dexy. Didn’t Scott give you the memo?
Posts by others were pure coincidence.
Niocorp executives have a lot more pull than the moderators.
A few bucks. Nothing significant. Cobalt market’s been hammered and cheap gas definitely doesn’t help the EV revolution. Too bad for other potential scandium producers as the market clearly needs those that can produce it as a cost effective byproduct.
Something around there, but that includes the loans. Pretty sure he now has an even 19,000,000 shares and I’m quite confident his average price paid is in the low .30’s USD.
Since he owns a hair more than 8% of the outstanding shares he would have to file until he gets below the SEC’s 5% threshold.
Actually they have historically deferred reporting this info until the management circular comes out alongside the annual proxy. I’m not sure why but it’s within SEC requirements.
Otherwise your point’s well taken. Very basic filings that all investors should be well versed on.
USD. Page 24 of the document.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000121390019018448/def14a0919_niocorpdevelop.htm
Its a little easier to access on SEDAR, IMO, as it will open as a pdf, but I can’t link to it due to the verification code they require, but with as much DD as you’ve done I’m sure you know this already. If not, it’s the Management information circular dated 9/19/19 and will be on page 29 of the pdf. It’s kind of critical reading for shareholders.
That was one of my initial thoughts as well, but after considering it further I doubt there will be much of any raise, although I’m sure it will increase his total comp package as he will almost certainly get more option awards with the new title.
He actually made $225k the last fiscal year. MS made $270k. We probably won’t know FY2021 salaries until September, but I think it’s unlikely that anyone without a title change would get a salary increase, and even more unlikely that the COO would make as much as the CEO, so realistically he’s probably “capped” at the $250k number you mentioned. A relatively insignificant increase in the grand scheme of things, plus MS is paying it all anyways so what difference does it make?
I think the real story here is that this is likely phase 1 of Mark’s exit plan. Give Scott a new title to groom him for 6-12 months and then Mark steps down and Scott is named CEO and Chairman of the board.
Marks got to be looking for a way to get out of this thing, recoup his investment or even make some money, and keep his reputation with NioCorp shareholders intact. It’s really the only way he can quietly sell his shares without alarming shareholders. It really works quite well from a PR and marketing perspective. MS can blame the delay on COVID and simply say it’s his time to step down and let the younger Honan, who really knows the technical side of the project better than anybody, take the reins and see this to the finish line.
Or I’m wrong and the “Big F” will be announced as soon as markets close today......
So NioCorp financing is delayed because they got hit with a double whammy of global acid supply chain issues due to a pandemic AND an earth quake at a key producer? News to me.
End of August is a very good estimate.
As of 3/31/20 they had $48k in cash. The smith loan was capped at at $2.5MM and drawn to $2.345MM. As you noted the cap was increased twice during the quarter, ultimately to $3.5MM, so they had $1.155MM to work with in Q4.
They also had $193k from the questionable PPP loan and $32k from the Shah/Sims options.
We don’t know how much they drew from the smith facility in Q4, but we can make a couple of other assumptions.
Accounts payable only increased by $38k during Q3 to $3.45MM. Seems fair to assume that whoever got stiffed in Q3 continued to get stiffed and this value probably didn’t increase much if any. Frequently AP is just a product of the reporting date. Let’s assume it’s unchanged.
Actual monthly expenditures, per the most recent filing, are $310k per month. $275k is for corporate overhead, which is nearly exactly what was spent or accrued in Q3. The smith loan increased by $785k. Add the $38k increase in AP, divide by 3 and there’s your $275k. Let’s assume the same for Q4, again assuming AP remained constant this time.
So, this means $825 was spent in Q4, while they had accessibility to an additional $1.38MM. That gives them accessibility to almost dead nuts $550k plus their apparent ~$50k cash buffer as it stands today - which covers them exactly through August.
So what’s the next move?
Nothing I wrote in that post was inaccurate. I’ve posted about the IPO and SPO’s multiple times with links that show the corresponding share price.
BM claimed Mark and Scott bought mineral rights. I’ll forgive the semantics for saying Mark and Scott as opposed to the company, but NioCorp does not own any mineral rights and BM is very much aware of this. I’ll give credit where credit is due and BM clearly understands the engineering side of this and has read through the FS.
His mistake was the claim that NioCorp owns mineral rights. They do not. They have options to obtain mineral rights (with royalties). It’s not a trivial matter, given the apparent lack of demand over these mineral rights.
I love it, thanks for doing this! You keep working your side to keep the price propped up while I’ll keep working my side to warn Nebraskans that they’ve been hoodwinked. This will help them get out with minimal losses or even gains.
The initial Phoenix project was mostly equity as they took advantage of rampant speculation in the REE industry and promotion by Goldman Sachs that drove the price up. They also issued some bonds at this time. Most of the debt was acquired later when they acquired NEO performance and with later bond issuances.
Not to mention some of price inflation after the various misleading announcements about heavy rare earths at mountain pass.
I actually agree with your first paragraph. Regardless of the final debt percentage, it would behoove NioCorp to put out a press release like this. Granted, certain aspects of the agreement may be subject to NDA’s, but if some sort of deal was in place, why couldn’t they put out a PR that says something along the lines of “Morgan Stanley (or bank of your choice), on behalf of NioCorp, has secured a debt syndicate commitment of xxx million for its Elk Creek Superalloys facility”. This agreement is subject to securing additional financial commitments for the remaining xxx million to fund the capex of the project.
If commercial terms were agreed to two years ago and if the company was really right on the verge here, why hasn’t there been an announcement like this? It’s generic in nature and helps all parties involved as to not violate any NDA’s, so where is it?
Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner!
Don’t you all think it’s quite a coincidence that both of them exercised options on the exact same day well before expiration? A little internal pressure, perhaps?
The irony is that the $30k is very meaningful to NioCorp given their state of finances, but next to nothing for Shah ($20k) or Sims ($11k). Why didn’t they exercise more of the available options? They could have bought 350k shares. Why’d they exercise them in the first place when they still have 6 months before they expire? Did they pay their own salaries?
Or did Sims simply finally pay his last tuition bill?
I’m using the most relevant assumptions out there. Go ahead and email the IR rep of any of those companies and ask for their current pricing predictions. Hint: they haven’t changed. If anything they’ve gone down.
The USGS prices today vs the prices with 5-20x supply is comparing apples to oranges.
Why are people using pricing for a single gram or a single kg to suggest it’s relevant pricing for all of NB’s 100 tpa?
The challenge remains, show me one third-party reference of Matheson being a scandium expert that isn’t simply a rehashed statement from a NioCorp PR. I’ll open it up further: Find a single reputable source not tied to Matheson or NioCorp that suggests anything near $3500/kg as a future price at 100 tpa.
The prices given refer to the smallest unit of a product. As a rule, prices cannot be extrapolated in a straight line in trade. The prices shown here are only an indication.
So wholly irrelevant. I’ll repeat, the discussion isn’t about current prices. It’s about what happens when supply increases 500-1000%.
Wikipedia doesn’t get sources. It relies on users for all content, which is remarkably good in most cases.
Other than that, the answer to your question is in the citations linked on the wiki article itself.
Do you understand what third party means? That’s a serious question. It’s loosely defined as an outside party with independent perspective.
You posted a Matheson blog post to support Matheson’s assumptions. You then posted an article that references the exact same blog post.
The facts are simple. We can argue about this company and what they’ve led investors to believe all day long, but it ultimately begins and ends with their pricing assumptions that are literally unsupported by anyone not affiliated with the company.
Dear, dear, Putz.
Please read the links you have posted. You are supporting my point. Did CleanTeq have input on those articles?
As for the analyst claiming $2000/kg pricing, I posted it a week ago. Contact info is at the bottom:
http://hallgartenco.com/pdf/Technology/BE_Feb2020.pdf
In regards to Kaiser, his credentials are so well published I’d be doing him a disservice by linking to one or two. Just google him as you continue your own DD. Also recall, briefly, I mentioned his name simply to disprove a previous posters claim that Matheson is the one and only “expert” in the US.
It only takes one example to prove such statement wrong. Now prove me wrong that no one else claims Matheson to be an expert and that all references to his “expertise” are a direct result of the NioCorp ad campaign.
Simply proclaiming I’m wrong doesn’t make it so. Let’s see your references and DD that prove me wrong.
And every time you bring it up one of us will point the rest of the board to the article that you selectively clipped this from.
https://investingnews.com/daily/resource-investing/critical-metals-investing/scandium-investing/scandium-price-need-to-know/
SCY puts current pricing at the annual 5-20 tons at these high prices. No one disputes current prices with that supply, although there is some evidence it has weakened. At least one analyst claims 99.99% is already down to $2000/kg - precoronavirus.
The key part you exclude:
Scandium International’s 2016 feasibility study for its Nyngan scandium project in New South Wales, Australia assumes a scandium oxide price of US$2,000 per kilogram.
Clean TeQ’s 2016 feasibility study for its Syerston scandium deposit, also in New South Wales, uses a long-term 99.9 percent purity scandium oxide price assumption of US$1,500 per kilogram.
Platina Resources (ASX:PGM) uses a US$500-per-kilogram scandium oxide price in a prefeasibility study for its Owendale project, released in 2017.
I’ll even give you that Platina has since updated their assumptions to $1550 in a DFS since the time this article appeared. Although that’s at 99.99%.
One of the keys to what you posted is this:
While 99.9 percent scandium oxide is needed for electrical applications, that isn’t necessary for alloy applications.
Electrical applications are SOFC’s. By NioCorp’s own admission this market is the least developed and furthest off for scandium, plus it seems Bloom already has a steady Asian source. The alloys are where the demand growth potentially lies, and they don’t need the “three nines”. Never mind the fact that aerospace takes years of testing for approval and Boeing would have provided the best opportunity and they went all in on the 737-Max. Your next best bet with Boeing is when they finally retire the 737 or update the Dreamliner - neither which is happening any time soon as you not only have the typical lifecycle of the current design being in its early stages, but also an industry that may take years to get back to its peak.
Your most immediate growth potential truly is in the sporting goods and automotive, and there’s no way either of those industries can support $3500/kg. It’s been tried in golf clubs and fishing poles for twenty years. It doesn’t work.
Factually incorrect.
First, Matheson didn’t “sign off on the FS”. Results of a private report he wrote for NioCorp were used in the production of the FS.
Second, John Kaiser is frequently considered the top scandium expert in the world. He lives in California. Ask him what he thinks about these price assumptions.
Third, who besides NioCorp has suggested that Matheson is a scandium expert? Show me one third-party reference of Matheson being a scandium expert that isn’t simply a rehashed statement from a NioCorp PR.
Got plenty already. No color as they are well worn. I’ve dug a hole or two in my life.
I read the PR and I thought “good for Mark.” I’m glad he finally incorporated some cautionary language into the “front page” report instead of relying on the safe harbor/forward looking statements, bespeaks doctrine, and rarely read regulatory filings.
You’re welcome, Doug. Please note that in my original post on the Rio Tinto information there was a further embedded link on the US’s agreement with Canada to work together as allies to secure these minerals.
https://www.canada.ca/en/natural-resources-canada/news/2020/01/canada-and-us-finalize-joint-action-plan-on-critical-minerals-collaboration.html
Rio’s initial target for scandium is in Quebec.
It should also be noted that US Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, has been working very closely with the Aussies, another one of our top ally’s, on trade deals for critical minerals there.
https://www.commerce.gov/news/speeches/2019/10/remarks-secretary-wilbur-ross-amcham-business-lunch-sydney-australia.
Finally, amongst all of the very well educated experts on this message board, I must say I’m extraordinarily surprised that no one has posted the follow up to Trumps Critical Mineral Executive Order that is so commonly referenced by NioCorp. Here it is if you’d like to do some more DD: https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2020-01/Critical_Minerals_Strategy_Final.pdf
“We’re on the verge here Nebraska”isn’t enough for you? How about the runaround with the pipeline, fake commitment to ESG, or the dead horse scandium prices?
Much of what I have is protected by NDA’s, and/or on the advice of council I shouldn’t post.
Most of that lines a joke. I have far more evidence I won’t disclose here on the basic ethical standard of not disclosing private conversations on a public board.
I promise to follow up with you on this issue later.
Far too late to edit, but I guess my last post should have added a few more fallacies to the ad hominems and strawmen. You keep saying the board has proven me wrong, repeating it until you believe it, yet no one is able to show it.
And don’t claim “they were deleted” your buddies have all my posts saved.
Sigh. Again?
How about this other recent article on Rio Tinto’s achievement, where an Australian mining (AUZ)executive pegs today’s price at $2000/kg and future price at $1000/kg. It’s the last segment:
https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-news-headlines/rio-tinto-s-scandium-oxide-breakthrough-tipped-to-normalize-critical-metal-58816989
Further insight into the current $2000/kg estimate in an analysts review of Bloom:
http://hallgartenco.com/pdf/Technology/BE_Feb2020.pdf
Scandium International:
http://www.scandiummining.com/projects/nyngan-scandium-project/
Full capabilities to produce 99.9% but include a blended purity price as the demand for 99.9 is extraordinarily limited.
Platina:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20181213/pdf/44161k2zf31rkk.pdf
99.99% at 1550/kg
CleanTeq:
https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2018/06/24/1528590/0/en/Clean-TeQ-Sunrise-Definitive-Feasibility-Study-completed.html
Lengthy but it’s there. CTRL-F scandium and you’ll find it all.
Imperial:
https://imperialmgp.com/site/assets/files/5081/imperial_mining_presentation_-_apr_2020.pdf
Very low market cap company but look at slide 24 where they take a direct shot at NioCorp and an Australian junior (can’t make out which one) for using inflated prices.
More ad hominems and strawmen, just like WS said. Posts after posts the last few days have made accusations against me. Prove them. In the meantime, for those that have just stumbled upon this board in the last few days, below are the projections of the other potential scandium suppliers. NioCorp uses $3500/kg on average. Any of these numbers would make the project uneconomical.
AUZ: $1000/kg
CLQ: $750-1500/kg
PGM: $1550/kg (up from their PFS number of just $500/kg)
SCY: $2000/kg
and the only other North American potential producer, Imperial Mining, assumes $1500/kg.
What are you all going to do when Rio Tinto enters the market? Talk about a disrupter.
https://resourceworld.com/rio-tinto-producing-rare-metal-scandium-in-quebec/
If it doesn’t take much then do it. Find one post where I said they would not obtain the air permit. I can think of one where I said they had a lot of work to do for it. It sure would start some more good times if you dug that one up.