The article seems to make it pretty clear why the value of Niobium / Tantalum stocks in particular might be more closely tied to compliance in reporting reserves... more so than many other resource stocks... as a function of customer requirements.
A recent history of producers not being fully honest with the markets, or with customers, either about the actual extent of the deposit and reserves being mined, or about the quality of the product being produced... likely REQUIRES them to find new supplies and new suppliers, with a more obvious need for both geographic and supplier diversification a key part of that.
It appears time to market may become a key consideration... as well as a having a track record and reputation for honesty and reliability... with both of those critical aspects being not wholly a function only of being capable of obtaining adequate investment to develop a mine. When partners are lining up to participate, access to $, or having money in the bank, has WAY less value than does the proven ability to git er done, do er right... and keep er goin.
It would be useful to have the local governments supporting mine development... and it might help, with that being much less of a problem, to develop a property that has a solid prior history of mining activity rather than trying to get a new find in a new location through all the paper hoops.
Also, having a larger list of multiple properties may not hurt, but it might not matter nearly as much having one good one that you ARE developing... that one that makes a lot more economic sense than others might. Decision making on development will be easier to the degree you have multiple values that each or in combination enable operating at a profit... without creating any over dependence on single customers or single commodities... and those customers will appreciate you, too, for being more viable and sustainable for the long term in that way.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
