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.
quiete right i have written the order of the divide by incorrect, grammar mistake.
NPV/shares outstanding = $ per share
NPV usually includes the cost of the CAPEX of a project along with operating cost, revenues etc.
therefore if you issue shares to raise equity to fund CAPEX that money is not added to the NPV, since it is already included in the project's net valuation. Equity raising is simply an alternative means to raising the CAPEX vs using debt. For instance you wouldn't add the money you get from borrowing from a bank via debt raised.
on the topic of funding it isnt clear from the company announcements or PEA whether or not they have enough funding to complete the requirements of a BFS. i.e. the cost of the BFS moving forward for instance greater resource definition via infill drilling, costs of further met work to 3rd party consultants has not been estimated or dismissed by the company.
welcome a critique of my analysis, perhaps i have assumed or overlooked something which materially changes my risk profile.
Comments on PEA
You can't focus on plus $150M p.a. EBITDA while ignoring all other figures. NPV takes all these figures into account in its calculation and so does IRR. Pre-tax NPV of $820M is far far figure from what this project was touted as being worth billions. Also this NPV is based on sub 6-9% discount rates a very charitable figure for a PEA report which is more in the vicinity of 10-12%. 6-9% is reserved for DFS detailed analysis.
After tax IRR of 13.9%, research what this measures and the importance it is to the investment banking world. It is a prime measure for how different projects are ranked and hence receive funding. It is a measure of their return for funding a project.
A project with capex in the vicinity of $700 to 900M is going to need a good IRR just for the amount of money to be risked.
This magnitude of CAPEX requires funding, you might assume a 50/50 or 40/60 equity/debt split then calculate the number of additional shares to be issued to the current outstanding of 190M shares and then divide those total shares by the NPV to give a valuation per share.
The current Resource estimate announced on the 23rd Feb 2015 is only indicated and inferred at approx 50/50 split, I believe the project is likely to require more resource definition via further infill drilling to upgrade some of the ore body to a "measured status" to complement a DFS analysis. This would then require additional funding not mentioned in the PEA
The grade % assumed in this PEA, a Life of Mine average figure of 0.82% http://www.niocorp.com/index.php/press-releases/233-niocorp-updates-elk-creek-niobium-mineral-resource-to-incllude-titanium-scandium-scandium-content-is-world-class
the link above shows 0.82% is the highest grade reported using the highest cutoff of 0.6% only applied to the indicated part of the ore body. Using more accepted cutoff of 0.3% cutoff as previously used in older announcements by the company to report its ore body (refer announcement 23rd feb2015 table 1) and used by other projects globally, the grade % average is 0.63% this reduces the amount of contained Nb2O5 by 25% and thus impacts the NPV.
The Krupp off-take is worth nothing at this stage. Krupp is a commodity trader they dont even have a financial obligation at this stage , if the mine is never built there is no agreement. In order to make a profit from the transaction Krupp will need to buy it from Niocorp at a price lower than the circa $40/kg market price it would then on-sell . The offtake announcement doesn't disclose what this reduced buy price is yet the PEA assumes all the Niobium is sold at the market price (typical of an offtake agreement direct with steel mills which is common in the Niobium industry). What if half of the Niobium produced is sold to Krupp at a 15-20% discount to the market price of Niobium and its impact to NPV.
Incorrect, detailed in their PFS. CAPEX to be less than $200M to produce Niobium.
As much as America is a stable democracy a quick google search will easily demonstrate their is more resource project investment in countries of Africa , Europe and Russia. One must be selectively in the country in Africa you invest i.e. Angola, Congo, Leone for instance.
South Africa, Tanzania are home to some of the biggest and longest serving resource projects worldwide.
Resource projects in the US dont get built for the same reasons as other parts of the world i.e. high costs, lack of funding, bad resource economics.
I'm still here.......
I have stated previously that my comments did not imply i am not long the stock so don't worry about me making money out of it, my posts focus around the fundamentals and the long term viability of the stock price to perform once this market buzz of uplisting wears off.
Two things move markets A) solid fundamentals and B) market sentiment momentum.
So far it has been the latter based on the uplisting (always going to give it a push) and the build up anxiety hype surrounding the fundamentals. A doubling in price in a week or so is great but as others have mentioned that momentum is not sustainable it is based on market momentum.
Apart from drilling and a updated resource (still yet to be measured status = requires more drilling) the company hasnt released any fundamentals of the project. Yes they have put in place commercial arrangements but offtake is not a signed deal the proviso is the mine must be produced, Krupp have no downside risk by giving that intent at this stage they have nothing to lose. these announcements to me signal a means to fuel the market buzz and it works.
my previous posts focused not on the market sentiment the stock would attract and has attracted but the fundamentals around the project, things like CAPEX, OPEX, and future drilling funding, met recoveries and sensitivity to concentrate grades. Even despite the months since my posts the company is yet to release these details not even progressive updates. It all seems to be hinged around a PEA that will disclose all, so a lot can hinge on just one announcement rather than the market progressively understanding the project. it is the fundamentals i am interested in since the market buzz will only last for so long and the fundamentals need to carry the SP further into the future....
oh and by the way others told me about a PFS or some confused it with the more advanced BFS coming out in Q1 2015 , now as others again have mentioned and mark has divulged yesterday it is now Q3/Q4 2015 for a PFS, the PEA is a less stringent report which is the one coming out next week. There is a lot of work for those familiar, to go from PEA to a PFS, this can range from technical to drilling activities.
The other thing i have noticed the recovery rates now people this week are saying it is assumed to be 60% which is in line with other projects , yet late last year people were banding around the company had somehow outperformed all others with a breakthrough technology to achieve 75% recoveries...
CAPEX will be interesting.......
The fundamentals may turn out to be a slam dunk but at this stage i dont know i only use the company releases to tell me, so for now I am making money on market buzz I want to know if I am going to continue to make it with fundamentals...
Well not what I am use to in my world.
So far the only news flow that has been released relating to the project is drill results, this doesn't constitute a PFS.
PFS and BFS can at times merge with the activities, so it will be interesting what news flow comes in the next few months, the results of it and then how that is packaged into what is deemed a PFS or a BFS. All i know is from experience the level of detail in a BFS is very involved , there is a load of work still required.
The way you have worked out the numbers is incorrect and therefore misleading.
See my earlier posts on calculation method.
you will need to factor in recovery%, concentrate conversion which is the product of FeNb that sells for $43/kg which is not the Nb2O5 Kgs specified in the announcement.
Then apply a NPV to cash flows to derive it in todays money.
Difficult to have a BFS without some portion of measured status of resource in your NI estimate. Indicated is not going to lure CAPEX investors, as the NI code states a Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability. Would you therefore invest hundreds of millions into a resource estimate at only this stage of classification?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mineral_resource_classification
$11M gets them to the next stage of being able to progress work to produce a pre feasibility study, there must have been reasons why they wanted $16M though and so to me that means there is $5M they wanted to spend which will require the next round of fund raising or ideally a share price over 65c to allow holders of the warrants incentive to exercise otherwise that money will need to be sourced elsewhere.
Portion of Measured status of resource will require a infill drilling program which given the depths of drilling and the costs of the other work currently underway, I doubt can be funded from the $11M just raised.
effectively it is a capital raise done at 55c per share plus you get a 1:1 free option at an exercise of 65c expiry 2 years from now.
Personally not a fan of handing out free attached options to capital raises but at times and depending on the market you have to offer that up as a sweetener.
Interestingly there isnt yet a mention of the status of how much funds has been raised? or whether the placement is already fully subscribed, should find out by the 30th.
great thing about diversity when you trade global markets, exposure and hedging across projects.
you should contact Denham Capital (tremont) about your concerns they are a $7.5B private equity firm.
but i am straying off topic, so enough said on that.
who is saying i havent had exposure, I am simply outlining the hurdles still to be overcome, which unlike others would hope to be believed are not certainties, as a result backing up the truck into it at this stage carries with it a lot of risk, risk i am trying to outline to people not all but some.
my saying there are no old bold traders.
It might come as a surprise to some but there are just as many reasons why this might not be a mine in 2 or 3 years time as there are reasons it might be and i dont like to punt my money on hopes and dreams but real fundamentals that have been detailed and released.
before we surmise about what capex is we need to first understand what the process flow sheet is going to be to demonstrate how much FeNb concentrate can be extracted.
infrastructure is relatively cheap , it doesn't cost much to build roads and put in transmission lines, a resource projects biggest component is the mine and processing equipment, that is the majority of the dollars.
Yes existing roads etc etc is a plus, but it wont be the reason why CAPEX blows out, unless you are building it on the north pole.
Total pre-production capital cost of C$870 million, including; $520 million for mine, concentrator and site infrastructure; $180 million for the converter, $100 million for offsite infrastructure including the transmission line, and $70 million for pre-stripping
Taskeo announcement on 2014/09/15, out of the $870M only $100M is for the offsite infrastructure including power.
$700M is for mine and converter and another $70M for pre-stripping...
but really all we have are opinions which markets dont have ears and listen to, hence why i prefer to have the company via its engineering consultants tell me what is the approx estimate of these costs.
Then i can go from there on how to evaluate things.
I have done so and my thoughts are plus $500M..
A. Underground mining to depths of 800-900mt and associated strip ratio.
B. what appears to be a hydromet acid leach process comes with a few $$ to produce the final concentrate
C. similar geography and depths as two other mining projects both who have north of $500M CAPEX
but to be honest the people closest to it is the company, and so I take my lead of their announcements when it is made on what the preliminary spend is estimated at.
what does your DD consist of?
and hence my 5 out of 10 rating, difference between a $10k trade and a $200k position.
how is then that some people are so sure this project will be mining Niobium or dismiss my posts as being without merit or that I am down playing the stock.
or put another way two projects who have provided all that information Niobec and Aley are considered by most to be too difficult to attract project funding and hence become mines in the near future.
It is great some bought this at 20c or lower and if you are still in then you are yet to realise profit, however , some have bought plus 50c to 70c and so do they fully appreciate the risks still involved and the development still required, or are they simply buying because someone disses my post says everything will be alright and keep the faith.
I dont see myself as being right or wrong, I simply see I need to learn more about the project through announcements.
Others dont need such information to take a position in the stock, but please refrain from presuming the project is a sure thing, post comments of that nature, when you dont have the information to make such claims, some see that as ramping! (and that last statement is not aimed directly at you but the broader audience)
and no I am not short the stock either.
again i ask can someone argue why it could not be possible for CAPEX and OPEX of this project to be like Niobec's and Aley's? and if it ends up that it is what does that mean for this project?
please lets not deal in opinions or i think, or hope or it just wont be, or it is a buy because i say so.
provide a sound logic argument we can discuss.
I see similar depth of mining , similar geographical regions, however without announcements i dont know if it will be same cost or cheaper or more.
I do know that it has higher grade and large tonnage.
or shall i join the earth is flat cross your fingers believers and say all will be ok the NPV of this thing is going to make it equal $5?
you misread my posts, it will be my intention to invest if the company announces positive results on the topics i have been discussing, and to invest progressively larger amounts as it is de-risked.
at this point in time what I and for that matter anyone else on this message board knows about this project is the drilling results, which are very good, the depth of the mine means underground operation to circa 500-900mt and that met recovery is looking like 60% in line with all other producers and projects of Niobium.
However this is only a small piece of a project. One thing i do understand is processing and from the words only, a hydromet with acid leaching can be an expensive CAPEX process to extract concentrate. However, I will wait to read a preliminary engineering assessment on the ballpark figures for CAPEX to determine what CAPEX looks like, rather than guess.
others prefer to use the word hope , i back my investments when i can see the fundamentals will provide value return.
each to their own. but without strong fundamentals based on all aspects of a project , it is at times difficult to recover highs in SP and then make further blue sky highs.
always helps when management chip in, but is it if they have completed 2/3rd of the raise thus far, does that include the $2.5M since it is assumed they are taking it up, and if so then they have only raised around $8M from outside parties
Don't really know, this is why i wait for announcements rather than speculate on such matters.
well so far after being warned by people about having to pay too much I in fact could have been buying it for less......and of course that is not to say we havent already made some profits from understanding the value of its market cap and where it is in the project cycle.
I have yet to have anyone state with logical fact and figures why could it not be possible that the CAPEX for this project is the same as Niobec and Aley projects which were circa $900M when they all have similar depth of drilling?
and on that note a similar type of OPEX margin?
anyone??
What if the CAPEX and OPEX is in the same ballpark? what would you give it out of 10?
My opinion is I dont know, i await the announcements to demonstrate these numbers and then can assess accordingly, and trust me there will still be upside at that point if they are positive announcements.
No I do not have any interest in the placement or affiliation with Mackie or the company.
Let me ask you this, The placement is yet to close, last week i ask if you are interested in a placement of stock XYZ you say sure what price? I say it depends once we close all subscriptions it will be based on a average of the last 10 days, you say well as opposed to me buying it on market at a price lower than that average i would want a discount to the market price
or would you have no issue paying 50c for stock XYZ trading currently at 44c??
i would be surprised if the placement wasn't at a discount to the current SP or at least some weighted average over X periods.
If you are going to throw in $16.5M you want a discount naturally, how much a discount it is, will depend on what the SP will do after that i feel, since too much a discount and the market may think the current SP is overvalued. i think we wont know until the announcement is made when they have completed the placement.
I must say though that 2/3rd fill to non instos is a bad sign for me. I am not a fan of the retail market for placements for the following;
A. retail tend to do things on hype and tend not to have the due diligence departments that instos have.
B. you will have far more shareholders issued stock and therefore it is not as tightly held than if the amount is place to say 4-5 holders.
C. retail tend to be more short term in approach, they will look for the faster exit , they individually have less shares so exiting on the market is easier. When you talk to instos or private equity groups they tend to have much longer time horizons.
D. if what you believe about people selling their existing stock to get replacement stock in the placement is true then this just confirms my point of C.
thus far i have Niocorp around a 5, healthy junior speccy that could turn into a good resource project.
to come to get it to a 7-8 they need
Clear path of all funding requirements and likely CAPEX funding avenue, the $16.5M wont be the end of the story, and the market later next year will then be asking ok where does the CAPEX funding come from, so announcements early next year pertaining to that will be critical. After all if people are believing that $16.5M is tough to raise in the market how tough is $500M or more going to be??
Full Met results and CAPEX and OPEX engineering assessments, i personally believe this has been a little bit quiet on this front.
I am cautious because i dont like losing my money in markets, as they say there are no old bold losing traders.
That last announcement was not a partial flowsheet, it was just some words with quotes of the recoveries they were getting, there wasnt any technical data along with it. Similar to the announcement on July 9, where it was then saying 75% recovery now it appears it might be 61%??
So they need
A. Proper Met work results
B. CAPEX and OPEX engineering estimates
C. Environmental update and approvals
E. more than likely post BFS, they will need to conduct further infill drilling program, to firm up the NI resource status, so it includes measured status of some of the resource.
F. Budget of the $16.5M what is it going to be spent on, so you can determine what is still required and hence requires future funding.
Basically they have to announce every aspect of a resource project excluding drill results and assay which they have provided already, and demonstrate good size and grade.
Until A, B, and F are done it is difficult to calculate what this thing is worth per share.
$3-$4 is a misleading figure for the new comer to read.
as you say based on the current share structure which it simply can not be based on for the value you are relating it to. In reality it just wont be like this.
for one there is going to be $16.5M at Xc added to the share structure. If you believe in the next 2 years then you need to better understand what share structure will look like by then based on the funding requirements over that period for the project. Some earlier this year didn't even think they needed $16.5M (but sure enough they did) , I estimate more is still required in funding over the next 2 years.
then you need to say are you assuming $3-$4 is NPV for the project which would need to involve a CAPEX estimate, and hence a equity raise of some %.
as for the Niobec deal it is great news for the Niobium industry. They did pay a good price for this showing the value of this metal. The difference between Niobec and Niocorp is production v project.
Niocorp in my mind only have released drilling results, this is a very small piece of the puzzle to demonstrating it can be a production mine. I am waiting in earnest to learn more about the other aspects , which i prefer to go with announcements than I "hope" it is good, wishful thinking is best left for the lottery.
The other aspect about grade when mining, is as the age of the mine goes on the grade will drop as you have already mined the higher grade. That is why it is important to look at the avg grade on the NI and not headline grabs of 1-2% grade, Niocorp resource is more in the vicinity of 0.55 to 0.63% currently.
a completed flowsheet doesnt need to come in after all drilling results have been interpreted, you may choose to, but it is not a requirement and I for one would have thought could have been developed by now given the number of drill holes completed.
A bankable feasibility study would need to contain a good portion of mineral reserve (measured status) and not just indicated and inferred. Since they have yet to have measured portion in the NI statement i cant see how 6 more holes is going to achieve that? but i await to be shown wrong.
refer to the announcement on Sept 22..
Table 1 - SRK Mineral Resource Statement Effective Date 9th September 2014
Classification Cut-off
(Nb2O5%) Tonnage
('000 Tonnes) Grade
(Nb2O5%) Contained Nb2O5
('000 kg)
INDICATED 0.30 28,200 0.63 177,000
INFERRED 0.30 132,800 0.55 733,700
(1) Mineral Resources are not Mineral Reserves and do not have demonstrated economic viability.
Upon the completion of phase 1 only 20% of the reserve is indicated.
are you of the opinion that the phase 2 drill holes will be suffice to provide a good portion as being measured (next step up from indicated) and be enough to achieve a mineral reserve? or do you feel a bankable feasibility study doesnt require a mineral reserve as opposed to mineral resource and hence not demonstrate economic viability? as outlined in the NI compliance code.
I would have also hoped for periodic announcements on engineering like CAPEX and OPEX cost estimates rather than it all be kept from the market and then simply released in one big packaged report.
not true, there will be many opportunities to get in, once the news flow details the aspects of the project, after all if you believe some here that it is going to plus $2 , then there is room to buy between 55c and then , wouldnt you say?
not unless the money is running out from the previous raise of $5M which is a possibility given the depth of drilling having to be performed, on top of paying salaries, rent etc etc.
there comes a point where you have to raise more funds to progress the work..
Unlikely at this stage of the game for the following reasons;
A. no process flow sheet released hence no method to extract the FeNb product.
B. with no A and no preliminary release of engineering costs no estimate of what CAPEX and OPEX will be.
C. no funding currently in place to progress the project to a decision to mine and hence no guarantee there will be production for an off take partner to grab.
As i eluded to in earlier posts and was dismissed by some (their right to do so) there surrounds a lot of uncertainty with the project still and markets dont like uncertainty and hence selling pressure takes hold. Meanwhile those wanting to commit $16.5M are reluctant to do so at the market cap the stock was commanding when in the 60s to 70c
opinions and hope is not what drives resource projects it is sound proven technical aspects of the project. To date and as much as people think this project is well advanced, the only news flow the company has released are drilling results.
There are still many aspects of the project that require de-risking. When these things are de-risked (via company released announcements) then the markets will rerate its market cap.
very good distinction between project and mine.
also within a project one should make a distinction between a reserve and a resource.
no one will, but a 10-20% discount on equity raisings is a good start, usually based on some recent weighted average on close price.
I am not too sure why people think i have been a non holder, however, all market players should not confuse paper profits with real profits.
great return sub 20c only if you have sold, an open position has two outcomes , it has the potential to either increase your paper profit or reduce it.
of course the flip side is that real profits once closed you no longer have that potential of either outcome listed above.
you easy pleased, the lows for 2014 were 0.01, however the average price for the better part of 2014 tended to be around 0.015??
effectively a 50% discount to the current price in order to raise only $250k, you tell me what you think of that price. drilling of just 2 holes wont be the whole story, there is having to be more drilling required and hence more funding required at some point, this type of dilution you can see where it is heading for existing shareholders. that $250k diluted about 3.5% of the shares on issue. I suggest when they spin it out as an IPO there is going to be another raise done and if as some have said (which is common) a reconstruction via share split then existing holders may find themselves diluted to the advantage of the new shareholders.
great for those who got it the new shares, however, if people are only willing to put money in at $0.008 price what does the street think of the current market cap?
In my experience with equity raising it means a dip lower first.
if you are so adamant on this tell me
once the last holes of phase 2 is wound up what proportion of the current NI (released on 22 Sept this already including the phase 1 drilling) can be moved into a measured status and of particular interest is the footnote made in the table of the difference between mineral resource and mineral reserves. To get mineral reserve status requires an extensive infill drilling program. Currently only 17% of the reserve is only at indicated status.
Table 1 - SRK Mineral Resource Statement Effective Date 9th September 2014
Classification Cut-off
(Nb2O5%) Tonnage
('000 Tonnes) Grade
(Nb2O5%) Contained Nb2O5
('000 kg)
INDICATED 0.30 28,200 0.63 177,000
INFERRED 0.30 132,800 0.55 733,700
(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.
ok buddy
once you get outside your small bubble and realise you are in a global marketplace dominated with foreign countries and investment we can have a discussion.
again if you can throw me some analysis of the project rather than words like i think this will go to $2-$10 once we get a process flow sheet or a feasibility study done, or there wont be any problem securing finance for this mine. perhaps do me and others a favour and leave your well wishes of what you hope the company will do to yourself, otherwise you just come off like a ramper!!
My motives pretty easy really investment thus far has done well in Niocorp, if you want it to continue you need to see good numbers on the other aspects of the project, make sure you know what these numbers mean , what is still missing and needs to be confirmed. Adjust your risk and trade accordingly.
backing up the truck for those who might have done it in the 50s and 60s i wonder if reading peoples well wishes and opinions is comfort. No room for emotion in trading or egos.
just like other investors today tomorrow and yesterday who have bought the stock, they believe there is an opportunity for it to return on their investment. Including me
however you need to realise that when you do make such an investment along the timeline of a project you will not have all the aspects of the project that says it is a green light so you are making an assessment on the unknowns. At that time of investment no one can say for sure with the small amount of information they had that this will turn into a mine.
Traders unlike Mark have an advantage in that we can sell when it might appear that it is unlikely or we can add when it appears more likely. He is now committed to seeing it through and determining what the technical due diligence of the project yields.
Why should I assume his assessment is going to turn out to be 100% right? just because at the start he put in a few million? put another way should i buy every stock you are putting your money into since it must surely mean all those investments will go up? otherwise why would you have bought it?
for instance why would Aley Project of Taseko spend $30M to date over 6 years and now be at a point when the majority of the project information is at hand that it appears unlikely short to medium term to ever be turned into a mine?
Many a group of people have sunk many more than $5M into resource, technology investments and not seen a return. thats not to say Niocorp is one of those but it is to say just because people put money into something it doesnt mean it pans out.
care to elaborate?
as far as being negative i prefer to think of it as risk managed assessment of a "potential" resource project as opposed to the bravado chips all in approach I am witnessing from some. People might not like it but as someone who has assessed resource projects when it comes to investment of funds, this project doesnt even have over 50% of the due diligence material required. I see some people wording and it makes me think that they believe this project is a given as sure as the sun rises tomorrow, talk about pulling from thin air.
it is of course your own money and your own decisions to invest how you choose. Hopefully you have had enough bullets to have played this game for a long time and to have earned profits for the journey.
no idea, like i said the announcement didnt contain anything you would expect from a solved recovery process sheet.
to me its still a work in process
even the title of the announcement NioCorp Announces Metallurgical Flowsheet makes you go OK where is that disclosed in the announcement.
All i am doing is giving my analysis on where this project is at based on the information the company provides, right now they have a inferred resource and currently doing met work in the labs..
CAPEX and OPEX engineering analysis is yet to be done, nor is an extensive infill drilling program (which typically only comes after the met work process sheet demonstrates the process)
thats ok i dont earn my money on my opinion but by my trading performance and analysis.
funny how I am the only one talking figures and numbers on this project rather than words, opinions and unsubstantiated assumptions.
yes and that was for a total of 11 holes, how many more holes do you think will be required to take the NI to a decent measured and indicated status that will satisfy the investment funds community and a decision to mine feasibility?
or put another way what percentage of the total reserve do you think will be at measured status in the next NI update?
only my opinion but i believe a lot more drilling than just the 10 holes recently completed is still required.
yes i found it a bit lacking on substance with hardly any definitive summary of data analysis relating to recoveries. It is the type of fluffy news almost to show the market they have done some met work but are yet in a position to divulge the analysis of it.
another thing I took out of it , for those with a chemistry hat, a Hydrometallurgy with acid leach process infers potentially huge capex and opex intensive process.
so for me I am still waiting on the chemistry side of things. the time taken thus far and apparent "work" still needed to complete the flow sheet is telling me that the met work contrary to other sources is proving to be a challenge.
lets hope they can crack it.