In the post this is a reply to, I addressed a couple of things to consider re SRSR's focus on deal making... that still look a lot more relevant to me than a lot of what has been posted here recently by others.
SRSR hasn't postured any issues in share dilution risks since Scott Keevil took the helm. They've done a spectacular job of preserving value while retaining a VERY high % of their properties, growing their interest, while also retaining value in its attachment to a share, with minimal dilution. And, clearly, given what they said in their last PR, deals done from here are likely to not be about transactions in SRSR shares, rather than about % interests in a JV on a property, or about % interests in shares of a spinout, whether for Shining Tree or Nio-Star. The PR clearly tips the scales in having us looking more toward the spinout scenarios vs. the JV scenarios...
I think others noting, recently, that there is lots of noise in the market about other deals going on for niobium properties right now IS relevant... although perhaps not relevant only because they all have a Nio prefix in their names. Also may not be relevant because there is some deal being considered that might combine one or more of the known properties into a larger collection. That might be interesting, if there is some exploration "consolidation" play afoot that prevents playing the various potentials off against each other... but... not enough information to even speculate about it that far, now.
There seems a common element in the "noise" that make it clear enough that China is active in the market... perhaps even a risk that the real "consolidation" play is one being operated by them, now trying to do in niobium what they have in REE. Much less clear what others are doing, as China has been relatively "overt" in their market interest... at least re tying up the Aussie company with the African property, that I don't think will prove feasible. Now, Iamgold is putting their property in Quebec on the block, too... perhaps a bit too late ? It may be just a tad too mature, and limited in future potential, to be relevant in the future focused game ?
There is an obvious shift in the tide occurring... with growing interest in niobium properties now, following the recent Chinese acquisition spree in accessible and mine ready sources of iron ore... which has us shifting from slack tide to a rising tide.
That the Chinese interest is obvious, given its high profile in the market... contrasts with the known interest of others... Japan, Korea, India... who are far more circumspect in the mode of their participation. Worth noting, perhaps, that while there is a lot of obvious resource stock deal making going on involving China, the experts are saying there is actually a lot MORE money in the market right now coming from India than China... and yet... you don't get ANY of the market noise ?
Niobium's time is coming... perhaps it is here now... but, comparing the properties that are in play... there really isn't much of a comparison to be made, still. Only one of those I see has the combination of size and scope, proof and potential, and a number of very obvious advantages in cost and feasibility, including all of the lowered risks and solid infrastructure support in Quebec, along with a large scale, low cost, open pit mining potential...
I note there are two or three persistent elements in the banter on the list that appear purposefully focused on distracting from the knowns... to focus the discussion on some aspect or another of the unknowns... paired along with negative assertions about the unknowns as if they are FACT.
Those are each remarkably persistent as common elements in the subject of the posturing by the less optimistic, here...
One of those is a distraction tied to the risk or potential in deal making... "hoping" they don't only do a deal for a small amount of money ($20 million ?) for a large surrender of value, etc. I've been consistent in saying investors benefit most from management being consistent in their approach... raising small amounts of money, and using them to generate LARGE improvements in awareness of value that exists, while giving up very little of their % interest. At Nemegosena... they've funded the development they've wanted to... while surrendering ZERO percent interest in the project thus far. PERFECT. The longer they can sustain that trend... gaining vast expansions in value... for next to nothing lost in % interest... PERFECT.
The more value they've proven before doing a BIG deal... the more value investors will retain as exploration proceeds to scoping and feasibility, and as development of the value of the property proceeds to development of the mine...
I'd rather they proceed slowly and continue making progress on proving value... until the right deal matures. The metrics that will matter... are % interests held vs. rate of increase in value proven and rate of progress in advancement of the project... not X $ value surrendered for X $. Not thinking about it that way ? Probably this is the wrong play for you.
The second persistent common element is variations on the mantra... "they're not doing anything"...
That line has a storied history here... with the most extreme example back in 2008... when the "pessimists" were saying "they have no cash, so we KNOW they're not drilling"... while SRSR was showing VIDEO of the Nemegosenda site with drills turning...
We hear the same crap now... "they can't raise money"... even though they've always been able to raise $ (including even before Dahlman came on board to help them get "better" $ and a better deal on the $ they raise).
And we hear the same crap now... "they can't be doing anything"... without either a reason to believe that... or any proof offered. If they've NOT been doing anything... that should be easy enough to prove... but, the only reliable sources we have... say they HAVE been exploring ? Hmmm.
The company has always been proven right in what they say. The pessimists are batting ZERO.
Not a hard choice to make there. I'd go back and look closely at what the company HAS said... if I had a question... and note what the changes in what the company has said likely mean, in that context.
Obvious enough evidence there are NDAs in play... with the usual suspects loudly assuming they could control only financing discussions and not other things ? There is obvious enough evidence from reliable sources that there is work that has been done that we don't know the result of... and all of that is consistent BOTH with what the company has said, and with the pattern of change in what the company has said.
The third obviously persistent common element is variations on the theme in the mantras inherent in generating false timing expectations and "the usual" in "calendar challenged" posts.
The first of those is the too obvious in the "90 days to a $1" sort of crap... which is another persistent theme of the pessimists here, to generate wholly artificial sets of timing expectations re some element of accomplishment re some fictional set of "events" being postured... and then claim the company has missed some "deadline" only because they ignored some silly IHub poster creating bogus time lines. See some of the same thing in discussion of "days, not weeks or months"... posted in relation to a mineral exploration project ? Those sorts of things are not even close to being grounded in the reality of how things really work...
The second element of that is another "repeat performer" in the tactics used to generate incorrect perceptions of "missed deadlines". We saw that last year in terms of a casual statement that had been made about potential in events that might be under tow by "the end of summer"... which were being loudly touted as a "whiff" and a "failure"... before summer had even BEGUN... ??? LOL!!! Now, we see a repeat performance in terms of SRSR "not doing anything" before the end of winter... even though we're not TO the end of winter, yet...
Looks like the pessimists are surrendering... just going through the motions... rehashing the same ole, same ole...
So, there are two or three elements apparent that relate to timing that ARE fairly obvious. I'll "name" them and then leave it for others to discuss until tomorrow... maybe later...
First, deal making... takes the time it does... so, news about deals being done (whatever deals are being done for) could drop at any time... or not... without it being likely you'll ever know what it is that is in train, or what the train schedule looks like (even without snow on the tracks)... until it is revealed.
Second, an obvious need still for some updates to our limited awareness of the results had from prior activity... but, those updates will require particular sets of hoops be navigated... and some of those hoops will have timing considerations of their own... so...
Third, the charts patterns have some predictions of their own to make re the sort of timing that a technician might project...
So... each of those is worthy of some discussion... along with the likely overlaps in them...
I'm not ignoring current events... and my first of three elements above notes "news could drop at any time"... but, a RATIONAL view of "how things happen" in deal making suggests that "guessing" what might occur when isn't the most useful possible approach to considering either change in value and fundamentals, or change that you can apply in trading strategies. When/if they announce a deal... then, that will be when you can "time" the impact of it...
All the other factors I see... suggest that SRSR should have a pretty good 2001...
Whatever the timing re events... the charts suggest SRSR should be trading at $0.04 to $0.05 already... and has a clear path to $0.10 or better just based on the charts, or as we get better clarity on some things, even without any transformational events being revealed...
Anticipation of the impact of some future transformational events ? I'd be looking for that to be better defined after we see chart patterns that evolve next...
Doesn't mean that they won't announce a deal in a few days, a few weeks or a few months...
From the charts... I'm looking ahead to $0.04 to $0.05 "soon", then maybe a nice, steady move to $0.10 or better... and, then, by May, June, July... we can see what the charts look like they're saying then... and see what the time lines look like then... based on things other than purely and purposefully manufactured distractions...
JMHO
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
