Sufiy's  Instablog

(click to enlarge)

Tesla Model S success is the game changer for Electric Cars. Tesla Motors is flying high now and will return the loans to DOE after the equity raise. While everybody else is listening to the Shale Gas and Oil bonanza Chinese companies are busy grabbing lithium resources all over the world.

National Geographic:

Josie Garthwaite

for National Geographic

Published May 21, 2013

Tesla Motors, the Silicon Valley electric carmaker, is riding high. The company reported its first ever quarterly profit this month and saw its stock price shoot upwards of $97 per share-an all-time high. At more than $10 billion, the company's market value is now greater than that of established automakers Fiat and Mitsubishi Motors.

And for icing on the cake, Tesla's first made-from-scratch car, the electric Model S sedan, has received a rare near-perfect score from Consumer Reports. Noting the difficulty of starting a successful auto company, evoltven Bill Ford, the executive chairman of Ford Motor Co., commented, "My hat's off to them."

The company is preparing to take advantage of its popularity on Wall Street by raising an estimated $648 million by selling a combination of shares and debt-like securities, to be repaid in 2018. Tesla CEO Elon Musk is set to personally purchase $100 million of shares in the offering. Tesla will curry public favor by using part of the proceeds to prepay some of the $465 million U.S. government loan that helped establish manufacturing of the Model S.

Tesla's upsurge comes at a time when a once-bursting field of EV start-ups is becoming littered with failed or sputtering ventures. Meanwhile, the established automakers have mixed sales results with their EVs, although customer satisfaction has been high. Nissan has seen accelerating sales of its Leaf after a slow start, with more than 62,000 of the EVs sold worldwide since 2010. For the Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid with a small gas engine that kicks in when its battery runs low on charge, sales of some 26,000 have not quite met General Motors' expectations. The cold reality is that the electric car business is still a work in progress. GM has said it loses money on every Volt sold. And much of Tesla's recent profit is due to California's regulatory incentives, rather than the sale of automobiles.

More than any other company, Tesla has helped transform the popular image of electric cars as nerdy golf carts for do-gooder greens to something that can be fun and luxurious and packed with cutting-edge technology. It pioneered a new generation of electric cars. Whether Tesla can rally mainstream consumers to the world of electric mobility, however, remains to be seen.

A Winner and Losers

Tesla's recent success marks a major achievement for the company and a rare moment in the history of automotive entrepreneurship. "Almost every other person who has tried to enter the automotive industry" for close to a century has failed, said Phil Gott, an automotive analyst for the research firm IHS.

Certainly the experience of other EV start-up companies bears out the challenges. Fisker Automotive, the recipient of roughly $1 billion in private investment and $192 million in public funds, sold only about 2,000 of its plug-in hybrid luxury Karmas (priced from $102,000) before suspending manufacturing last year. The U.S. Department of Energy has pulled the plug on the rest of the half-billion-dollar loan originally awarded to Fisker in support of a plug-in hybrid sedan that never made it past prototyping. And Coda Holdings, parent company of the Southern California-based startup that set out to build affordable electric cars on a platform from China's Hafei Motor Co, has filed for bankruptcy after selling fewer than 100 cars and racking up $100 million in debt.

Would-be suppliers of batteries to these and other electric carmakers have fallen along the way. Fisker's battery supplier A123 Systems entered bankruptcy last year, as did Ener1, battery supplier and investor in a failed electric city-car effort by Norway's Think Global.

Tesla, too, has seen hard times. In its ten-year history, the company has experienced product delays, lawsuits, battery and transmission troubles, and coffers so low that it took a hefty portion of billionaire CEO Elon Musk's personal wealth to keep it afloat in 2008. "Just want to say thanks to customers & investors that took a chance on Tesla through the long, dark night," Musk tweeted last week. "We wouldn't be here without you."

Tesla, it's fair to say, has leveled up. The company is now at the point of building cars in its own facilities from the bottom up, thousands of them each month. Based on monthly sales data, the advocacy group Plug In America expects the generation of highway-capable plug-ins born in the last two years to reach 100,000 vehicles sold by the end of May. More than 7,500 of those are Model S sedans, which sell for about $70,000 to $100,000, depending on the size of the battery and options.

Mass Market and Upmarket

Nearly every major automaker has a pure electric model on the road or soon to launch. Many of them are derived from conventional models like the Chevy Spark, Honda Fit, and Fiat 500, and several will initially sell in limited numbers in only one or a few markets-most notably California, where large automakers are required to sell zero-emission vehicles. Others have aimed for a broader swath of the market. Nissan moved early on to sell its Leaf nationwide, and adoption has begun to accelerate beyond the historical EV capital on the West Coast, and the electric version of the Ford Focus now sells in 48 states.

Distinguishing itself from this pack, Tesla from the start cultivated an aspirational brand, modeling its retail experience after Apple's sleek stores and targeting elite customers who would drop six figures on an electronic gadget with a green aura. The company's inaugural model, the Tesla Roadster, wasn't for everyone (the tall or weak of budget, to start) or every purpose (no dice if you want to haul all the gear for band practice), but it looked sleek and drove like a dream.

To a wealthy and tech-savvy niche group, it was perfect. "For that target audience, the more exclusive, the more expensive, the more exotic, the better," said Gott, senior director of long range planning for IHS Automotive. Sure, the Roadster was more expensive than the Lotus Elise body it was based upon, but it was unique. "Cocktail conversation" about the Tesla technology and VIP quality of service, Gott said, was part of the attraction of owning one.

Analysts say that Coda and Fisker erred in opposite directions: one was too superficial, the other was not superficial enough. "Fisker's biggest mistake was thinking that design was everything," said Michael Omotoso, senior manager of global power train for the research firm LMC Automotive in Troy, Michigan. The Fisker Karma is a great-looking car that drew Justin Bieber and Leonardo DiCaprio among its earliest adopters. But it had serious flaws, including unimpressive fuel economy relative to other plug-ins, too much weight, and a price point above even luxury hybrids that wealthy buyers might consider as alternatives, such as the Mercedes-Benz S Class or Cadillac Escalade hybrids.

In contrast, Coda aimed early on to provide an electric version of the most basic sedan. The practical look and good-enough performance became a tough sell, however, as the company's costs and price estimates swelled. Once expected to sell for about $30,000, the Coda Sedan ultimately debuted at roughly $45,000. Whereas Tesla and Fisker marketed Louboutin-like luxury style and charged accordingly, Coda put out a generic look and charged designer prices.

After multiple delays during years in which the options available to EV shoppers in the United States grew from a solitary highway-capable model (the Roadster) to around ten in 2013, the Coda launch simply offered too little too late. The car ranks dead last in efficiency among all pure electric vehicles in the 2013 model year, racking up an estimated $850 in electricity costs each year. That's pretty good compared to top-selling conventional sedans like the Honda Accord, but not compared to the $500 annual fuel costs estimated for the Nissan Leaf, Fiat 500e, and Honda Fit EV, and Scion iQ EV-all of which carry a well-known car company's brand and warranty. To make matters worse, in the midst of its bankruptcy proceedings, Coda now has a "potential safety issue" on its hands and must issue a recall. Regulators have reportedly found in crash testing that side curtain airbags in the sedan "did not deploy as intended upon impact."

Aside from starting at the high end, Tesla also developed other streams of revenue in addition to building and selling cars. The company formed key partnerships with well-known automakers, including Mercedes-Benz and its parent company, Daimler, as well as Toyota. In the first three months of this year, Tesla reported $7 million in revenue from development services. Another $68 million, or roughly one in every eight dollars of revenue during the quarter, came from selling credits earned under California's zero emission vehicles (ZEV) program. About $17 million came from sales of "other regulatory credits."

But these credits are more of a bridge to a bigger vision than a lasting pillar of Tesla's business. "Right now, their profits come from selling EV credits to other companies," said Omotoso. "They need to start making money by selling cars." As Tesla recognized in its latest report to shareholders, ZEV credit prices are falling as more automakers come out with qualifying vehicles, and international sales are worth less in the ZEV credit market than U.S. sales. So as Tesla pursues global ambitions, the company expects the portion of its revenue coming from ZEV credits to decline.

Next in the pipeline from Tesla is an electric crossover called the Model X, which, after some delay, the company plans to roll out in late 2014, likely with a lower price tag than the Model S. Sales of this third-generation model "should help," said Omotoso, because one model is simply not enough to sustain a company for the long term. "The Model S is hot right now, but it will eventually cool off like all hot models. Then what?" he said. "Once the small group of wealthy, image- and environmentally conscious buyers have been satisfied, they have nowhere to go until they come out with another model." Based on the limited pool of buyers who can both afford the Model S and who want an alternative-fuel vehicle, he said Model S sales may already be close to peaking at an estimated 20,000 units in 2013.

As many gauntlets as Tesla has run so far, the company's biggest challenges may still lie ahead. The temptation to go too big, too fast-to think, "Gee, if I can make this much money selling hundreds of cars, think how much more I can make selling millions"-is a dangerous one, Gott said. It will take time for battery technology to advance to the point where is possible to sell a "no-compromise" electric car capable of driving hundreds of miles between charges at a competitive price point.

Electric cars today can meet many, if not most day-to-day mobility needs. They can spare drivers pain at the pump, and Tesla is building out a network of fast-charging stations for extra assurance and convenience on the road. But gasoline remains the default choice for most car buyers, and switching to electricity still requires some new habits and a different mindset. "Most customers don't buy technology. They buy utility, convenience, low-operating costs, style," said Gott. If Tesla's business plan anticipates and keeps pace with the evolution of batteries, he said, and "if Tesla can walk that tight rope without over-investing and losing money before the market is ready, they will succeed."

This story is part of a special series that explores energy issues. For more, visitThe Great Energy Challenge."

(click to enlarge)

This new move by Rob McEwen can be very positive for the company and means that now Los Azules will not be up for the fire sale just to finance the El Galo II and the proper bids for the projects will be welcomed by end of Q2. El Galo II can now be developed without throwing out the Los Azules to the first buyer coming alone. PEA is due in Q3 and we can have dramatically different markets by then as well.

In the big economic picture Yen was rising against the US dollar from overnight and, as we have twitted before - Watch The Gold Now. Gold has it fireworks today and is UP 35 dollars or 2.6%. Over-shorted stocks like McEwen Mining do not need a second reminder about the explosive nature of Junior Mining - company is on fire today with 5.5 million shares traded only in US (Canada was closed today) and is UP 18.9% to 2.33 dollars. Tomorrow will be interesting day with Canadian markets open - we need the follow through action now with Gold and Miners to confirm the April Gold Low.

Meanwhile TNR Gold insiders continue to accumulate:

McEwen Mining:

Links to AGM Videos.

"El Gallo 2 Alternative: Evaluating potential to ship ore from El Gallo 2 to El Gallo 1, using current heap leaching facilities. Review will focus on silver recoveries (early column tests returned between 45-62% silver) and crushing/processing costs. If successful, this would eliminate approximately $170 million in capital expenditures."

(click to enlarge)

"Los Azules is a large undeveloped copper porphyry system located in western San Juan Provincewithin a belt of porphyry copper deposits that straddles the Chilean/Argentine border. This belt contains some of the world's largest copper deposits, including Codelco's El Teniente and Andinamines,Anglo American'sLos Bronces mine, Antofagasta PLC's Los Pelambres mine and Xstrata'sEl Pachón project, among others. Los Azules is one of the world's largest, highest grade, undeveloped copper-porphyry deposits not owned by a major base metals company."

"Action with McEwen Mining was quite interesting this week and, particularly, on Friday. Stock has refused to follow the Gold that day and stubbornly was climbing higher all day. Rob McEwen was making some of his magic on Thursday at the conference call after the Q1 update and McEwen Mining Shareholders meeting will be taken place next week. Chief Owner has promised release from one of the exploration program before it and Los Azules new resource estimate is due by the end of May. According to his facebook page, Rob was on the road last few weeks talking to numerous Investment Banks..."

"Now you can slice and dice it: what will be the price for Los Azules and what will be the effect on McEwen Mining and, particularly, TNR Gold valuations and market caps. All slides are from McEwen Mining presentations."

Mineweb:

McEwen Mining outlines a possible third path for its El Gallo II silver-gold mine in Mexico.

Author: Kip Keen
Posted: Friday , 17 May 2013

HALIFAX, NS (MINEWEB) -

McEwen Mining (NYSE: MUX) had said it is considering what to do with its El Gallo II silver-gold project in Mexico - specifically, how to finance the estimated $170 million capital cost or optimize the project's scope to something within its means. Failing here, El Gallo II would certainly head to McEwen Mining's back burner.

The main hurdles for McEwen Mining are this: it doesn't have enough cash to build it on its own and financing markets are tough. Meantime, gold and silver prices continue to fall. Thus, in a conference call last week, McEwen Mining President and CEO Rob McEwen said that although the project was still moving ahead, with permitting in the works, construction might not start later this year as it has hoped.

Making deferral seem all the more possible was the uncertain future of McEwen Mining's Los Azules copper-gold project in Argentina, now on the auction block. While McEwen hasn't capitulated in the search for a buyer for Los Azules, he sounded pragmatic about the ongoing sale process: There's interest, but a crowd isn't swelling at the door.

In part, the problem here is that the appetite for undeveloped mega copper-gold projects is somewhat tepid and meantime there's a glut of assets, some operating, up for sale. Thus juniors with large undeveloped copper-gold deposits for sale face stiff competition.

But a third path at El Gallo II may keep the project alive - neither deferral nor the $170 million Plan A. You might call it the mother of all mine optimization plans.

El Gallo II was, as outlined in a feasibility study late last year, to be a 5,000 tonne per day open-pit operation with milling and whole-ore leaching. It would exploit 38 million silver @ 101.3 g/t Ag and 46,102 ounces gold @ 0.12 g/t Au in reserves.

But in an update today McEwen Mining said it might forego a standalone operation completely, with a processing plant and whole ore leaching, and instead ship El Gallo II ore to El Gallo I, McEwen Mining's operating heap-leach gold-silver mine about five kilometres away

The benefit of doing so comes down to a trade-off. Far less capital costs - expansion rather than new building - in exchange for what would likely be far lower recoveries. In the El Gallo II feasibility study last year McEwen Mining estimated it could get 84 percent silver and 83 percent gold recoveries in a standalone El Gallo II operation with whole-ore leaching.

However, put the same ore, trucked and crushed, on a leach pad at El Gallo I and the silver recoveries, based on McEwen Mining's metallurgical testing, could drop by about a third to half that of standalone El Gallo II. McEwen stated that "early column tests returned between 45-62 percent silver."

Thus El Gallo II - Los Azules sale or no - and terrible financing markets be damned - could still become a reality. For McEwen Mining the key question now becomes: Is the trade-off worth it?"

Please Note our Legal Disclaimer on the Blog, including, but Not limited to:

There are NO Qualified Persons among the authors of this blog as it is defined by NI 43-101, we were NOT able to verify and check any provided information in the articles, news releases or on the links embedded on this blog; you must NOT rely in any sense on any of this information in order to make any resource or value calculation, or attribute any particular value or Price Target to any discussed securities.

We Do Not own any content in the third parties' articles, news releases, videos or on the links embedded on this blog; any opinions - including, but not limited to the resource estimations, valuations, target prices and particular recommendations on any securities expressed there - are subject to the disclosure provided by those third parties and are NOT verified, approved or endorsed by the authors of this blog in any way.

Please, do not forget, that we own stocks we are writing about and have position in these companies. We are not providing any investment advice on this blog and there is no solicitation to buy or sell any particular company.

(click to enlarge)

"Los Azules is a large undeveloped copper porphyry system located in western San Juan Provincewithin a belt of porphyry copper deposits that straddles the Chilean/Argentine border. This belt contains some of the world's largest copper deposits, including Codelco's El Teniente and Andinamines,Anglo American'sLos Bronces mine, Antofagasta PLC's Los Pelambres mine and Xstrata'sEl Pachón project, among others. Los Azules is one of the world's largest, highest grade, undeveloped copper-porphyry deposits not owned by a major base metals company."

"Action with McEwen Mining was quite interesting this week and, particularly, on Friday. Stock has refused to follow the Gold that day and stubbornly was climbing higher all day. Rob McEwen was making some of his magic on Thursday at the conference call after the Q1 update and McEwen Mining Shareholders meeting will be taken place next week. Chief Owner has promised release from one of the exploration program before it and Los Azules new resource estimate is due by the end of May. According to his facebook page, Rob was on the road last few weeks talking to numerous Investment Banks..."

"Now you can slice and dice it: what will be the price for Los Azules and what will be the effect on McEwen Mining and, particularly, TNR Gold valuations and market caps. All slides are from McEwen Mining presentations."

May 16, 2013

TNR Gold Corp. Advises of McEwen Mining's Increased Resource Estimate for Los Azules Copper Project

Vancouver B.C., May 16, 2013: TNR Gold Corp. (the "Company" or "TNR") advises that McEwen Mining Inc. (NYSE:MUX, TSX:MUX) ("McEwen Mining") has issued a news release dated May 15, 2013 in relation to the Los Azules Copper Project in San Juan Province, Argentina. TNR holds a 25% back-in right, exercisable upon the completion of a feasibility study, on the northern part of the Los Azules property.

The news release issued by McEwen Mining summarizes an updated mineral resource estimate completed on the property. In their press release McEwen Mining states, "Key developments include the successful conversion of inferred resources into the indicated category while increasing the size of the resource. The resource remains open along strike, to depth, and laterally." The news release is available at SEDAR http://www.sedar.com and onhttp://www.mcewenmining.com. TNR encourages its shareholders to read the press release issued by McEwen Mining to gain a better understanding of the work performed and the potential impacts this will have on the project. McEwen Mining has also stated that an updated preliminary economic assessment ("PEA") will be completed later this year that will utilize the expanded resource and "will evaluate the possibility of: (1) increasing the daily throughput; (2) producing copper cathode instead of a concentrate and (3) processing low-grade mineralized material not previously considered, via a heap leach".

McEwen Mining's press release appears to be prepared by Qualified Persons and the procedures, methodology and key assumptions disclosed therein are those adopted and consistently applied in the mining industry, but no Qualified Person engaged by TNR Gold Corp. has done sufficient work to analyze, interpret, classify or verify McEwen Mining's information to determine the current mineral reserve or resource or other information referred to in the press release. Accordingly, the reader is cautioned in placing any reliance on the disclosures therein.

The Company has a 25% back-in right in the northern portion of the Los Azules property which is exercisable following the completion of a feasibility study. If the Company elects to back-in for 5% or less or has its interest diluted to 5% or less, TNR will receive a net smelter royalty of 0.6% from the Northern Portion.

The Los Azules copper deposit is located in the San Juan province of Argentina. McEwen Mining Inc. is the current operator on the Los Azules copper deposit and the Company has previously advised that on March 13 and March 28, 2013, McEwen Mining Inc. issued press releases in relation to the deposit, which are accessible on Sedar at http://www.sedar.com and on McEwen Mining Inc's website at http://mcewenmining.com.

Over the past twenty-one years TNR, through its lead generator business model, has been successful in generating high quality exploration projects around the globe. With the Company's expertise, resources and industry network, it is well positioned to aggressively identify, source, explore, partner and continue to expand its project portfolio.

TNR is also a major shareholder of International Lithium Corp. (TSX:ILC.V) ("ILC"), a company created by TNR to advance its internationally acquired lithium prospects. TNR currently holds about 25.5% of the outstanding shares of ILC.

At its core, TNR provides significant exposure to gold and copper through its holdings in Alaska and Argentina and is committ ed to continued generation of in-demand projects, while diversifying its markets and building shareholder value.

John Harrop, PGeo, FGS, is a "Qualified Person" as defined under NI 43-101 and has reviewed and approved the technical content of this news release.

For further details please see our website at http://www.tnrgoldcorp.com/s/NewsReleases.asp

On behalf of the board,

Gary Schellenberg

President"

Please Note our Legal Disclaimer on the Blog, including, but Not limited to:

There are NO Qualified Persons among the authors of this blog as it is defined by NI 43-101, we were NOT able to verify and check any provided information in the articles, news releases or on the links embedded on this blog; you must NOT rely in any sense on any of this information in order to make any resource or value calculation, or attribute any particular value or Price Target to any discussed securities.

We Do Not own any content in the third parties' articles, news releases, videos or on the links embedded on this blog; any opinions - including, but not limited to the resource estimations, valuations, target prices and particular recommendations on any securities expressed there - are subject to the disclosure provided by those third parties and are NOT verified, approved or endorsed by the authors of this blog in any way.

Please, do not forget, that we own stocks we are writing about and have position in these companies. We are not providing any investment advice on this blog and there is no solicitation to buy or sell any particular company.