Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.
-
Instablogged Stocks
Stocks that instabloggers have most recently written about -
Latest Instablog Posts
-
1
TZ Limited Signs Fastway Couriers To A.D.A.M...
-
2
Golden Gate Petroleum Produces 29% More Oil ...
-
3
High-Sensitivty C Reactive Protein (HsCRP): ...
-
4
Robert Edwards Trading Update For May 20, 2013
-
5
Vascepa Lowers Lipoprotein-Associated Phosph...
-
1
-
Top Instablogs
See all Top Instablogs »
REE/Strategic Minerals Concentrator, Feb. 7, 2012 171 comments
Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.
Share this Instablog
This post has 171 comments:
Well, clearly this is not how production hill should look. I'd say production hill is delayed but still certain. I don't know if its delayed due to the nascent industry or the lack of price history for the commodities at this level, but there is a lot of caution for now. I am going to play it more cautious than original plans. But the success seems inevitable to me at this point. I really see nothing wrong with Lynas but the crowd controls the share price and their interest seems weak.
For now, I will hold positions and wait for the demand. Pressing the issue could prove disappointing at this stage. Better to hold and take comfort in the progress of what looks like a great company to me.
Aqwert,
Feel free to do a gap analysis on GW anytime if you like. I've seen you do TA on them, but never a gap analysis.
http://seekingalpha.co...
http://bit.ly/zchM2m
GW chart is a bit smoother that LYSCF. If I were a buyer, I would wait to see if 1.43 (or the equivalent in Aus) holds. If it does, and volume comes back in I would buy. But if 1.43 does not hold, then I would look to mid 1.3xx making sure that 1.34 holds. (that would be a good place for a mental stop) You have a smaller gap on 1/19 at 1.20 that is open as well. But it is not surprising that folks took profit on that monster gap up. Text book trade imo.
Bar Council wants to pull Lynas license. (I am not sure who the Bar Council is or the reliability of the Malaysian Insider.)
GW is up from the 50cent area Jan 27, 2012 and from the 39c area on December 27, 2011 on news of the furnace pour and the JV with GQD. As an FA guy, that makes sense to me and I complimented the furnace pour. I do want more information about the JV, but I called what we know better than no JV and wait with others for more information.
But a rise in any stock (especially in a junior on news) creates some gaps. Gap theory essentially says a stock must return to lows before going up again. I think the view that "nothing goes up or down in a straight line" is wiser than a gap theory. GW and Lynas can both consolidate and then move higher without returning to lows in my mind. But concluding that a stock must return to a certain low because there is one is nothing more than fancy down ramping to me.
As for your TA trade, I'd rather follow HTL. He actually trades his view. If you would have shorted Lynas further up or not road GW down I might think you had more conviction in your TA. I wrote my last post because I own my trades. I encourage you to do the same.
http://bit.ly/zQT9um
No, it does not. Any gap - be it up or down- is subject to filling. How often does the market gap down... rally to fill the gap and head down again? Or gap up and then fall to fill the gap and start to rise again?
I know more than a few traders that just make their living off of playing the gaps. That is all they do and do it quite well.
Buy the rumor, sell the news is the olderst play in the book. No magic TA there.
I haven't even lost yet. I already admitted I am wrong about production hill starting.
Regarding the Malaysian Bar and Lim Chee Wee, they do things a lot different than the US. Here, our state and national bar associations would comment once or twice and then take the case "Pro Bono" or move on. Wee has commented for months on end but never agreed to represent Stop Lynas or to file the injunction Stop Lynas wants. This article says Wee "demanded" and "urged" the government but still does not name him as the Stop Lynas representative or indicate a filing. In the US, our lawyers would say we are well past the "put up or shut up" phase to use the British merger term.
But there is good reason the injunction has not happened yet. Injunctions require quick action by their nature. The plaintiff must prove irreparable harm will result that cannot be addressed by other court means later on. To prove this the Malaysian Bar would have to dispute the Professor report, the Malaysian science and nuclear report, the IAEA report and the AELB and Cabinet conclusions. That is a lot of expert evidence to overcome. And to do that and create large damages to Lynas (who would counter sue) and to destroy MITI's development plan is unrealistic.
Sooner or later an injunction will be filed. It is the logical end to the political drama. Will it create a "sell the rumor buy the fact situation" I don't know. But I do think it is a procedure that will mark the end to Stop Lynas that is long past its prime already. I think all of this is old news to Lynas and just politics in the next election already. Curtis said in the investor call that he thinks the next election will not be a problem for Lynas either way. I agree with that view.
As for the chance of a suit from the luddites (I cannot help repeating this characterization), I agree, it will come and be poorly fabricated (like all their arguments) when it does come.
I'll wait to see what tomorrow brings. If he want to hang on to his "win" that is fine with me.
Not even I could do that. (Stick with my post at the top of the concentrator.) Look, I am wrong about the trade and that's it. If I hold on to a hollow victory it would not really make me right.
Most important it is the wrong type of wager. Our annual bet is outperformance so GW and Lynas can both go up and each can feel good about it. Creating a bet on a single stock (even Lynas) going up or down was my first mistake. Outperformance is conceptually a better wager.
The LAMP story IS a complex one, even without Malay politics and geopolitical maneuvering thrown in. And LAMP is a subset of the larger Lynas story... And the Lynas story is a single entry in the greater rare earth narrative...
And the mass media (even that which is highly focused on mining and investments) is near-universally befuddled by even the simplest version of the re narrative.
We can only expect a slow dawning of comprehension most of the time, and an utter incomprehension the rest of the time.
If I had a share of Lynas for every time I've told someone (off this particular blog, of course) that they cannot believe everything they read about the rare earth sector, I would hold more shares than does Mitsubishi.
I think that's (the USD) is one of the reasons the S&P rallied today - Greece is "all better now" again, the Euro rises, the dollar tanks and the market rises - just like "the old days".
I won't be surprised if LYC is down in OZ tonight, because they raised rates(?), and it's up here tomorrow because of the toilet-paper USD that Mr. Bernanke has been so thoughtful in providing for us.
HardToLove
If we see a continuation of the drop in LYC from yesterday, ignoring the reversal of that trend which occurred with the pinks here today (which I don't directly attribute to the exchange shift, I believe it exceeded that by a good margin), it would mean that a general reversal was underway.
But I don't expect that. Hopefully we are cycling back, perhaps as high as the $1.70 I expect to represent short term resistance.
Anyway, I am also no fan of some TA truisms, including gap tracking. For one thing, the key element underlying the huge majority of investments and trades is time and its decay. Gap data needs to include cognizance of how it lies amid the recent charting, and what sort of volatility has been occuring over what time span. Estimates can then be inferred, but this is still not a stand-alone TA element I would hang my hat upon.
As for this current situation, I see it as coming to pass due to things other than a gap in the stock's statistical history. A powerful TA element followed by many chartists is the effect of the 200DMA, and this is something which is in play for several leading stocks right now, including GWM and MCP as well as LYSCF. Although there are several juniors that have managed to breakout past their 200DMA, the majority of the rare earth sector has not, and this makes it a near-unanimous sector TA factor which bears watching (I find TA to be most valuable when applied to the largest possible sample size, which is also why I discount it a bit when charting individual smallcaps). If there is any TA factor affecting the trading of Lynas (particularly on the ASX100) right now it would be the resistance of the 200dma, IMO.
Looking over the list of re stocks I track, the stocks showing the least effect of the 200dma are QREDF and my old favorite trade, HREEF (which I have simply been too busy lately to give full study).
I expect to see Lynas start to track closely along the 200dma over the next 2 or 3 months. When it ultimately strongly pierces the 200dma (and it will), this will mark a period when I expect news and events to propel it.
I will second that TB. I thought it was too.
Yes, the 200md, outside the BB, the gap, profit taking, all reasons for Lynas to fall a bit. I never said that there is one and only one TA thing to hang anybody's hat one. TA is one of many tools. And you can't leave out news, earnings, outside political nonsense, etc. Nothing happens in a vacuum.
http://mwne.ws/xvpf3j
On Steen "Assay results will be reported as they are received from the laboratories." I take that to mean we have no numbers yet that's why there were none in the prior PR. Fair enough, but it could have been clearer before in light of industry practices.
Phase 2 launched targeting the strike extension of the monazite vein mineralization immediately west of the current mine site.
Good.
In 2011 GWMG made application for Prospecting Rights surrounding the Steenkampskraal site. That application, for Prospecting Rights for an area of approximately 1,000 square kilometers, was not accepted initially and the appeal remains in progress.
Not Good, but helps explain some delay. Any issue between stock and the government bears watching IMO.
GWMG has agreed to issue 2,072,484 shares at a deemed price of $.63 per share to settle amounts owing to Mr. Trevor Blench in connection with the acquisition of Rareco and the exercise of the option granted by Mr. Blench in 2010. The issuance of such shares is subject to TSX Venture Exchange acceptance.
This looks beyond the November offering.
The ventilation distribution system is designed to substantially mitigate radon measurements in the working areas.
So the development has cost more and been delayed due to radiation issues. Not a surprise.
The rest of the development looks good. Mine management team a good idea.
Red Wine seems to be going well.
GQD information is a good update but we need funding and cap ex updates from here.
Far as the shaft ventilation is concerned, that was needed (and I would hope planned) from the beginning. The radon was mentioned in older documents and critiques (by Kaiser I believe, who called it a "radioactive bat cave" a few years back).
This is all linear with existing announcements, adding a few crumbs, but without more details as to funding and the jv, I am still in a holding pattern with this stock.
One thing I didn't mention that should be considered. GW indicated the mine refurbishment would be done in 2011. As it stands on the shaft 50 meters are remaining to be completed. These are the bottom 50 meters after completing the easier upper 125 meters. I estimate this means they are about two thirds done with the shaft.
The foundations are being constructed for imminent installation of the head gear along with all transfer hoppers and steelwork. Since we had photos of the head gear on site I guess it is still sitting like in the photo. This suggests it will still be a while before refurbishment is done and I think a cost overrun here is likely.
I would say your comments suggest you figure something similar. But for others out there I suggest all REE miner holders get use to it. Lynas needed more money and got it with a convertible bond; Moly raised $390 million with a Molymet investment; and GW will be raising cap ex estimates IMO. And these are the guys building. The rest likely will face even bigger surprises in cap ex requirements if mining tradition holds. In fact, I would say all first movers have a cap ex advantage as well since these costs in mining never seem to go down
I have considered GWM's cost estimates and timelines suspect from the beginning, so I am not surprised that they are now shown to be costing more and taking longer than anticipated. The share price is in line with my expectations as well.
I agree that the first movers have an advantage - and one that will grow as the gap between producers and juniors grows by leaps and bounds. There is a reason I am long the 3 leaders, and overweight Lynas and GWM...
This was a discussion on this Concentrator early last year, I believe, and was couched at the time with Lynas promising completion by September 1, and with GWM looking at a similar timeline to that we see now, despite not yet even closing on all the Rareco stock they needed. MCP, LOL, was talking big, but had nothing but a muddy field where they planned to build their new processing plant. Progress has happened, no doubt, but everything is taking longer and costing more.
Looking forward we can see the future much more clearly - LOL, because its MUCH closer than it was.
I honestly wish I had been wrong about the delays for GWM - right about the timeline for Lynas - and wrong (for the sake of all those buying stock for over $70) about MolyCorp's plans. Now we are closing in on the time when I had hoped to be able to put some of these long running bets into a more trim and organized situation, but it looks like that will not happen. Now I have to decide how much I will leave at risk through March, which is when I anticipate we might see a general market correction (10-15% best guess).
I really felt they needed to explain the earlier drill announcement with no numbers. And committing to "hit the vein" in Phase 2 is important too.
Kaiser is tough. I wish he was here. He is tough on Lynas and GW and likes Quest and high maintenance "near artic" roads. He would fit right in IMO.
Overall, I have reread it and still like it more than you, TB. I do think there should be more on the application for Prospecting Rights. What is SA saying there? I am sure the SA reasoning would seem weak. The whole area is open, near nothing, and with residual radiation. What do they want? to put government offices there? I would support that.:-)
I may be getting combat fatigue though.
How can they not be updating their timeline? No way its still current, they will do well if they can meet that plan +1 year. This will probably still put them in the race with MCP, and Lynas has overrun their own plan by a good bit, so the offset is still about where it was... But that assumes good news on funding and so on. They try to finesse the problem with the line about them and QD continuing design work even while they were locked in their delayed negotiations, but that's weak beer.
I grade them a "Hold" until I see funding on the table and a design everyone signs off upon.
I normally don't sweat drill/sample results until the lab has actual numbers, but this slow roll along with the other delays is irritating. Alone its normal, but as a group with all the other hanging chads...
The PR application getting turned down might be a function of asking for "a lot". Even in a large and open area like the region where Steen is located, "1000 square kilometers" is a mighty big footprint. One has to assume that SA gave them some reason for turning it down, but its obvious that whatever the reason was GWM is not forwarding that datum to us just yet.
I think funding may not come till an NI 43-101 is achieved. I know GW is in SA and the Stockhouse group is hopeful as always. But if you're management and you are confident about Steen's value, much better terms should be available after an NI 43-101. Thats an old mining principle that still applies IMO.
This is important with GW because the burn rate and balance sheet are awful and funding for these projects is limited. I'm sure GW wants to avoid a Matamec type situation (part sale of Steen to GQD). And a big offtake seems difficult in the business right now. So if those thoughts are right I think funding with an offering at this share price is not in shareholder interest. Better to drill phase 2 get the NI 43-101 and get funding then.
In a way, an offering for funding now would raise big questions about the Steen drills. Of course, if another company loans, funds with or through an offtake, or buys in I would feel the Steen drills must be good. Just things to watch I guess.
On the negative side I think Phase 1 drills might not be good and insiders pushed GW to "hit the darn vein" with phase 2. But that is as much speculation as "the resource is sure to expand". Both are guesses and the real information needed is lacking at this time.
In this case I believe the most attractive funding might be that provided by government - and SA has a program which GWM might well qualify for. Second most likely would be a funding deal with the Japanese customers, which I believe is less likely now that Toyota is moving independently to setup re mining in Vietnam. I suspect the window for that alternative closed about 8 months ago.
Given that the processing plant (and primary funding gap) is likely to operate long after Steen is exhausted (whether that occur in 7 years or longer), the case for funding the processing subsidiary is not dependent upon expanding the resource base IF they can show that other sources for feedstock exist nearby (ie, the often discussed titanium miners, plus several other rare earth startups SA is encouraging).
With GQD on board the primary hangup for funding the processing plant is eliminated, and now it becomes a bankability study requiring that sufficient feedstock be found to substantiate the plant. I would agree that the best possible outcome would be that the Steen resource be confirmed and hopefully expanded. But I suspect (and this would be typical for Engdahl's style) that they will not wait but pursue seperate funding from the South African government program.
Take it from a Lynashead, combat fatigue is a way of life.
I applaud GW for the update. Sure Moly went up on no disclosure with a pending lawsuit and GW went down on transparency, but it was the right thing to do and an honest effort. If they update the timeline with funding that would be transparent enough.
Take it from a Malaysian political expert, these governments do strange things. I think it is just something to watch right now.
Don't let great be the enemy of good. This was a good update overall with irons in the fire.
I read this to mean:
"Boy that Lynas! Time to leverage up!" :-).
Just kidding.
I think buys are fine if a staircase develops but the leverage has to account for the large volatility and the size of the expected climb.
So if I think Lynas can go to $5 producing and going well by the end of the year. The best approach is to keep the leverage low and add slow. This is defensive toward remaining risk and volatility but should still follow most of the gains. That's my current approach
A belated congratulations on the LYNAS TOL.
I am looking foward to good things from them.
I hope everyone is holding UAMY still as I think that baby will fly!!!!
I'd say there is more good news to come for both of these stocks.
"Rare earths not so rare" seems to suggest sorting the sector and Rare Elements Resources specifically.
http://bit.ly/zUAsIW
Nothing new - just another hack getting some revenue income AFAICT.
HardToLove
http://bit.ly/A6GPXS
http://bit.ly/x70iOd
http://bit.ly/z6jZq6
http://bit.ly/wXI2lV
http://bit.ly/zcukYK
TB: You playing any PAL or PLG these days?
And anyone heard from DG (not to be confused with OG) lately?
Also left PLG last year about the same time. I'm still studying the platinum group miners, no conclusions yet...
DG is deeply involved with GOOOH (a national political movement) and is probably spending a lot of time on that in this primary season.
...Wonder who will supply their uranium, etc?
http://seekingalpha.co...
http://bit.ly/wAqqLq
Their TREO numbers are still relatively low.
I persist in believing that this project might make based upon local politics in Sweden, and larger political backing in the EU, plus geopolitical factors (China's increasingly low ratings as a reliable supplier).
Well, the recent reports from Japan of a REE cooperative agreement between China and Japan now appears to have just been some empty boasting on the part of an Okinawan business association president.
Oops.
Logically this makes loads of sense, and should bolster stocks in the rare earth sector (and ex-China rare earth prices).
But there are loads of other factors, of course...
let's hope this is it then.
HardToLove
So far RBS (which publishes brief summaries from time to time with their analyst take on Lynas) has been spot on since the TOL. If you don't want to shell out the money for their full service (and I don't either), this link has been posting their free info:
http://bit.ly/xs2KVg
hope you have a nice weekend...
It's a win.
On the FA front I found this article very interesting:
http://bit.ly/zYv2Vl
Lynas: Residue from rare earth plant will be safe
I would not be surprised to see a pivot in the Lynas waste debate now that Lynas is approved. Perhaps now we will progress to an honest discussion about Thorium that could benefit all of the rare earth stocks.
BTW, I did top up a bit recently on LYSDY. Thought I got a good deal at $1.51. (!). How about, in the future, I tell everyone what I trade and when I do it so you can all do the opposite and make millions :-)
Lynas has talked about liming the 6 Bq/gm waste to under 1 Bq/gm (the Malaysian non-hazardous standard) you are mentioning. I think managing director Datuk Mashal Ahmad means this waste but is not mentioning the liming process in the article. The other two gypsums are not radioactive and thus I presume they are not the focus here.
It would be news and since the other two streams are under 1Bq/gm on there own I believe we must be referring to the WLP (or main radioactive) waste. I think the only reason to stay quiet is the liming technique never impressed them before, maybe it would just restart the debate now if we approached it that way.
http://bit.ly/wyvHho
caveat: unless there really is another shoe...
http://bit.ly/yKsTT4
http://bit.ly/vKm6n6
The last word from Smith is "on time and on budget" so I guess those form digs and foundations will be a completed industrial project in six weeks with commissioning for six months after that.
Should be a great conference call coming up. Holders should keep in mind that this is still a 30 PE stock and the earnings likely dropped with the REE prices in the fall. I doubt the Grace contract change plugged those kind of holes. Still, Moly is holding in so far. Hard to explain for me.
Molycorp, Inc. (NYSE:MCP - News) today announced that it will release financial results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2011, after the market closes on Thursday, February 23, 2012. Release of Molycorp’s financial results will be followed by an investor conference call at 4:30 p.m. Eastern. Mark Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer, and James Allen, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, will host the call.
Investors and news media representatives interested in participating in the live call from the U.S. should dial +1 (866) 543-6403 and reference passcode number 49932366. Those calling from outside the U.S. should dial +1 (617) 213-8896 and reference the same passcode as above.
A telephone replay will be available approximately two hours after the call concludes through May 23, 2012 by dialing +1 (888) 286-8010 from the U.S., or +1 (617) 801-6888 from international locations, and entering passcode 84743189.
There will also be a simultaneous live audio webcast available on the Investor Relations section of the Company’s website. The webcast will be archived on the website for 90 days.
3rd quarter 2013 production would be my best guess for production of Phase 1 Phoenix at this point, but frankly I see this reflected in the current share price. If they truly were on schedule, the share price would be in the 40's.
I am curious to see whether they have managed to goose their productivity this past quarter up to their goal, and what pricing for their production actually fell out of the bottom line.
the six degrees of separation of MCP and the molymet deal... all you need is Kevin Bacon.
Lynas speaks.
Lynas down $.10 per share today.
SIgh. I guess we should be happy it didn't go backward.
Hope this gets more coverage from management going forward.
"SIgh. I guess we should be happy it didn't go backward." Not I! Their burn is ever increasing. The assumption, at least on my part and I know Chi's as well, was that that was due to the final push to complete construction. I think most of us were also working with the idea that LAMP was 95% complete.
Finding out that we were off by 4% AND, more importantly that nothing has been done IN 2 MONTHS is pretty infuriating for me. It seems that, in truth, our assumption of 95% completion must have been far off the mark and thus our expectations were off the mark accordingly.
Set expectations appropriately up front and make some reasonable progress and we're good in my mind. Nothing like unmet expectations to get my Irish up.
Lynas management: A little communication PLEASE!
The Lynas protest groups are following a checklist of things to protest and target: plant completion, material import, plant operation, etc. Every time Lynas makes an announcement to its investors, they are also announcing to the opposition to file more grievances, threaten nuisance lawsuits, and stage protests. I can imagine the initial import of material could get ugly at the Gebang port if the opposition can plan on when it will arrive.
I don't know if this is part of Lynas' thinking, but I'd rather they keep their eye on the really important events (i.e., output of finished product ready for sale) then worry about short term price movements that have a big impact on traders but minimal impact on investors IMO. They got their POL, which allows them to move on their internal schedule without announcing every step to the outside world, both friend and foe.
I guess I can see your point as well, but frankly who cares about the opposition and demonstrations and nuisance lawsuits? Pre-POL I had concern that they may get traction and interfere with Lynas getting the POL. Now ... let 'em squawk! They can waste all the time, energy and money they want. Lynas has the POL. As long as they don't screw up, I don't see any chance of that going away.
On the other hand, as long as my money is what NC as his cronies are taking home and stuffing their bank accounts with, I'd like the respect of a little communication. During the final weeks leading up to the award of the POL, I could buy their silence because it had some strategic justification. Now, it's just plain lazy and disrespectful IMO.
You're probably entirely right that communication from NC to the shareholders isn't going to have any affect on 2012 profits. On the other hand, I don't see that it detracts from them either. It means NC has to let someone play through on #7 while he reviews a press release. Isn't that the least he should be doing for his shareholders. I want that longer -term progress as well. My point is that, in this case, we should be able to have our cake and eat it too. NC isn't anything to get things buttoned up at the LAMP.
Ramp up to Prod. (Phase 1) = 2nd Half, 2012 (I est. October or November, fallback position December)
First Cash Flow from Sales = 2nd Half, 2012 (December) or Q1 2013 (more likely, though I expect they will push to get this in 2012)
I suppose we will have some form of this discussion till production, but I say this is wrong. Mount Kellett and Lynas would not have agreed to a six month hold or done the convertible if they thought your timeline was right. They know more than us. First feed April. First production June. First sale July.
Time to buy Lynas IMO.
Now, my estimates as to WHEN within "2nd Half, 2012" production ramps could be debated, but if NC thought it would happen come July, wouldn't he have said "Q3" instead of 2nd Half? If he changes the timeline to Q3, I would be doubtful, but I would then set the production ramp process to reach some success by the end of Q3, which would be September 2012. But this is not the current timeline announcement. Perhaps it is me being too conservative, but I view 2nd Half as meaning they will have achieved their goal if they complete the ramp by December.
First shipments to customers would then logically fall beyond that point, as would cash flow, of course.
I read Lynas differently from the presentation:
"Lynas is on track for first feed to kiln and first production in Q2 2012"
http://bit.ly/AmW6Lh
(Slide 14 - Grey Highlight)
After a period of customer qualification, commercial shipments will commence with full plant ramp-up occurring later in 2012
(Slide 20)
Lynas continues to be engaged in a number of additional negotiations with key customers in Europe, Japan and the US concerning potential supply agreements.
(Slide 23)
Mount Kellett provides comprehensive funding facility through to first cash flow from sales.
(slide 28)
Lynas will be online in 2012, delivering Rare Earths globally.
(Slide 29)
You said:First Cash Flow from Sales = 2nd Half, 2012 (December) or Q1 2013 (more likely, though I expect they will push to get this in 2012)
Which announcement are you quoting TB?
On Cash Flow from Sales I'm guessing if first production is Q2 2012 and these companies are eager for oxides, Customer Qualification should be quick is LAMP is built right. Based on the Concentrators quick production success I say July for this.
Not sure where the misunderstanding is but I'm buying.
The flow chart on slide 20 is the source for my read that they anticipate ramp-up 2nd Half 2012. This would be my read from "...later in 2012" following Q2 (this leads to 2nd half 2012).
Optimistic read: Customers start writing checks and production is shipped July 1, 2012.
My estimate: This occurs after ramp up to production which doesn't occur until the end of 2nd Half 2012, or October (maybe November or December) 2012, and commercial production meeting customer requirements (and shipments yielding actual earnings) following, which again I think might happen December 2012, but could also follow in early 2013.
Could be just a glass half empty/full discussion.
My take would be that achieving those milestones will support and move forward the share price whenever they occur during 2012 and ultimately 2013.
http://bit.ly/z36ri7
Reviewing my list of REE and Strat. Mineral stocks, I see some action possible:
ARAFF, sitting on my buy target of $.35. Recent news of a slow down in their development plans has resulted in a drop in share price. Those looking for a trade may have to be patient... Whereas those looking to be patient might want to buy and hold for year or so... I'm long and small this one, but maybe I'll add some cheap shares if I decide to keep it through 2016 or so.
GDLNF: In the middle of the current trading channel at $.53. For those who bought recently when it was in the low .40's, I would sell and wait for it to retreat back to the high 40's (my current buy target is $.47). I'm long and small this one too.
GOLDF: This one has once again retreated back toward a potential buy, but I am holding out for $.12x, with a trade at $.16+. Long this one in the sock drawer.
GWMGF: Great Western's pop from the LCM furnace install now waits upon news of earnings. If GWM makes LCM's new capacity pay (and I hope they do, they invested a lot of money in feedstock last quarter), I would expect to see $.80+. I am long and overweight GWM.
IAALF: I continue to trade IBC between .13- and .17+, accumulating low cost net shares. I am long IAALF.
MCP-PA: While the other leading REE companies flounder, MCP preferred is showing some small life (up about $2 over the past few days). Consensus analyst estimates are shrinking, but also merging toward a more cohesive number. I figure this stock still has some headroom from current levels, and consider it a buy around $60. I am long MolyCorp Preferred and plan to buy more as the price hits my target.
QREDF: Over-acheiver of the month. Still hovering near recent highs, and still a "sell" at these prices, imo. I have raised my buy target slightly in light of the demonstrated strength, however, to $.19.
SNDXF and warrants: Up nicely recently and today (it is hovering just below my sell@ target of $1.60, for those trading Sandstorm - I am currently holding and building a larger core, so this is not in my plans as it might have been a few months back). I have raised my buy target for this one somewhat to $1.30. I am long and accumulating this stock.
TAMO: Recent high prices have seen me sell off most of my holdings in this stock, and now I am waiting to re-enter at a lower level. My buy target is .16-. I am long TAMO with a larger core goal yet unfilled.
TAS: Tasman is a stock which I recently began trading, with a small core goal to be filled with low cost average shares. I sold off all but those initial core shares at $2.45, and it is now trading in the middle of its recent range. My current buy target for this one is $1.89.
UAMY: I continue to trade and accumulate this stock, buy target $2.10-, selling at $2.90+. I consider this one a current "sell" at $3.00. I am long with a small core holding.
UURAF: UCore continues to trade near the middle of its recent range, and is offering only occasional trading opportunities. I have just a small holding for this one in my sock drawer, though my buy target is $.44- and my sell goal is $.58.
I am also trading SRSR and USMN as volume permits.
I continue to monitor QRM, AVL, NOURF, ALKEF, URRE, and many others, but I am not trading them now.
What do you see in the near - midterm future for ALKEF and NOURF? Any activity or catalysts that we should be watching for?
GDLNF- If you had to pick a loser I would start with high production costs and this one has major cap ex in front of them. Avoid.
GOLDF- Thanks again for the prices. They have a company? Sorry I've never read the website except the line that says "Rare Earth Prices". Pele was a hell of a footballer. Let's watch Japan restart uranium before we buy too much IMO.
XXX- Hypothetical. If I owned an explorer with a former uranium mine that drilled 39 holes and gave me no numbers before drilling the next holes I would not like that.
MCP- I don't trust them and they have a lot of work to do. I can see the trouble but is it baked in? Not at a 30 PE IMO.
QREDF- This explorer has a lot of good minerals and elements. Could they become a North American Alkane? Worth a look.
TAS- Maybe. Too early for me, but don't rule them out either. Eudialyte is a mineral with a lot of conflicting information in my research. Overall, it appears some mines are making progress with the mineral.
UAMY- Looking good. I like your buy range TB, but would be slow to sell. This business model may be maturing and the risk reward as an investment is getting good.
UURAF- This is a small mine. I know Lifton has talked about smaller is better for cap ex and I agree when it comes to Greenland and artic projects. But the economics of scale built Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton and merits respect. I think it is on the size border but might pass based on it's CREO ratio and content.
Increasing their visibility ought to help their stock price. Some days no shares of ALKEF are traded, whereas ARAFF has much more activity. I have watched Lynas, Alkane and Arafura for about a year.
ALKEF is looking for financing to develop DZP. Chambers is entertaining all forms of financing from a partial sale, offtakes, ect.. Alkane has done there homework and progressed well so far. I expect the funding to be positive not negative. There will be dilution but it will be expected and if it is large enough it could leave them fully funded.
TB often says there is good and bad dilution. For me that definition depends on the mines stage. When a company has done enough feasibility work to know what they need and then gets sufficient funding to do their construction, that should be a good thing. I believe Alkane may be ready for that point.
NOURF
Northern Mineral had some good surface samples which is fine but not important to me. Currently they are drilling and optimistic. They also might be near a capital raising. This raising would be for cash in a stock with a long timelime. I expect the raising to hurt the share price when it happens. NTU - Cash (31 December 2011 in AUD)
$2.6M
I do like this stock still. It is a very long term hold and add. The xenotime reduces metallurgy risk. And the low capital costs with high CREO content is key. They are still 4-6 months from a JORC. But when you look at the detail in their prior announcements and presentations it suggests the JORC process should be smoother than many.
This company has done drill disclosure right. Drill maps, intercept lengths, TREO% for each drill, recovery percentages and even TH and U counts. Great job of reporting that should set the standard IMO.
No sweetheart, I was listening... You were saying something very interesting... I'm not sure I fully understood the whole concept.... That's right it was about taking out the trash. Now I remember. :-)
http://bloom.bg/zCvTPE
Why bother to issue a POL if there are supposedly five strings attached ? Seems like the article is dealing with a current comment from Malaysia's AELB. What are these five conditions - I've only heard about the 10-month window for providing the long term waste disposal plan.
Why bother to issue the POL with strings attached? It's called CYA. Every one of the 5 points is to take some responsibility away from AELB and to put it on someone else.
Why require a letter explaining how they intend to fulfill the 5 points? Maybe the relationship between LYC and AELB is a bit frosty. Just guessin'
Question: How many people does it take to make up an AELB? Answer: 3 (1 to set the rules and 2 to move the goal posts)
Is there a clause in any agreement that says the govt would have to pay $$$ to get out of the deal?
Or they could just be stringing this out until after whatever election they plan on holding, win that then give Lynas the go-ahead.
Just speculating along with everyone else....
I doubt the have much of a leg to stand on - just trying to dely I think.
Looking for a free link - haven't found one yet.
HardToLove
TB, did you know about this and do you have an opinion?
http://bit.ly/ABExeO
Pure speculation, but I believe we will see the various conditions fulfilled when the time is right for Lynas.
http://bit.ly/xYFT0u
One such hole appears to us to have intersected nearly six metres of what appears to be high grade monazite; it is appropriately located between material that appears to be the usual hanging and foot walls.
http://bit.ly/w9gWm7
Byron tends to take a very bullish view on Steen. As an example, they mention only the top ore grades of over 16% in this report even though the TREO historical average is 11.65%. So it may be that the intercept of less than 6m is the top intercept of the 17 HQ drillholes designed for resource expansion. Steen’s monazite is high grade so a smaller intercept should yield more TREO per tonne than other projects. But I know of no other currently exploring rare earth mine with published drill results that has no drill highlights above a six metre intercept. Therefore, this report raises my concerns about Steen’s feasibility a great deal. We will await results from here.
My full comments on the issue are here:
http://bit.ly/wyX5bj
Thanks for the links.
Caution certainly sounds warranted here.
I was aghast at $4M/month in compensation. I hadn't realized it was *that* high.
HardToLove
The math looks conservative but in line with what could be expected from 50,000 tonnes of gross annual ore production netting 5,000 tonnes. This 1:5 ratio is a bit lower than the 1:4 ratio Lynas has been getting, of course, but I suspect Lynas' Mount Weld operation really is likely to be the standard others are measured against as time goes on.
Presumably this Byron estimate is not based upon the huge tailings piles and sorted ore piled and waiting for the mine's re-opening, which are reputed to average over 16% TREO (I seem to remember it being over 20%). One would expect them to operate from those sources first, giving them a jump start (and another reason its really too bad the processing plant is not already up and running, since they could operate like MCP has been doing, without actual mine overhead, for a considerable time to bank some profits and work out the processing wrinkles.
That monazite is really dense stuff, isn't it? The 6 meter vein of monazite ore they noted (heavy stuff running 5 tonnes + per cubic meter - I knew monazite was a heavy, dense mineral, but that's quite amazing, really) would only need to yield 10 cubic meters of ore to fill the entire mine's annual production goal. Their note about the mine requiring just a single small shift to meet expectations once it was in operation makes sense in that case.
I would expect that Byron would definitely cite the best intercept they know of in their report. I would also expect a much more complete and professional report from GWM when they supply their official results. I always find it irritating to see teasers like this released prior to lab results (note that they are not really affirming that it is monazite, or that it contains a high percentage of TREO). Better to wait until the results are properly compiled and certified.
http://bit.ly/ApKTC7
At the same time these are the first drills so assuming the historicals are a given and just adding the drills to the calculation would be a big assumption in my mind.
A little less than half of the resource estimate for Steen is in ground underground (117,500 tonnes) and that portion is a TREO estimate of 16.74%.
http://bit.ly/A4yiJD
(Slide 10)
That estimate is twice the grade of the rest of the Steen estimates and almost twice the grade of the top grade for a drilled project in the world (Mount Weld CLD)! If those numbers come in lower and the resource is not extended much, the overall estimate could fall from there. While the GW hype makes that seem impossible, I'd say it is the most common result in mining from my investment experience.
There is no clear view here. But on any exploration too much silence is far from golden IMO.
It's $4 million a quarter, not per month. I think you misread my article. I still think that is very high compensation for this stage in a company this size.
http://bit.ly/A4yiJD
(Slide 10)
There you will note the surface tailings are 85,000 tonnes of the resource estimate at an average TREO of 8.29%. These too are historicals needing verification and offer no more promise of accuracy either. I don't know if this is a "surface sample" historical estimate or if a more detailed approach was used. But if Moly can rave about their tailings, why can't GW rave about theirs?
All monazite is dense, and high grade monazite would be denser due to REO content. But Byron is not giving actual weights in the comment. They are simply saying less volume of high grade monazite is required for extraction to equal the same tonnage of a less dense form from a different project. So what? It is the usual Hykway trivia designed to make himself feel smarter than everyone else. I ignore it if I can use it for investing. And since he didn't weigh anything I can't use it.
Honestly, I found the report to be the usual Hykway toss. This guy has no respect for his readers intelligence and I think he is the dumbest guy in rare earths IMO.
Bull or bear on this we lack facts. That's the nature of speculation. Once we have all of the facts the trade will be over. But the unsupported assumptions on both sides are rather high at this point.
Do you think there might be a lag period before we might see some improvement? Will there be some point in the future where people
suddenly wake up, and the sector just pops?
We are already seeing signs that the brief flush of new supply is ebbing, and it also looks like it was insufficient to refill the gravely depleted stockpiles of the Japanese, Koreans, Taiwanese, Germans, etc.
Now we see which geopolitical goal China will work on next - their plan to squeeze the Japanese high tech industry into relocating their plants and technology to China (which would require that they maintain high rare earth prices and low supplies ex-China) - OR any plan to disrupt the nascent Western companies like Lynas, GWM and MCP might have to enter large scale production. At some point I expect the math will favor China shifting from one strategy to another, or perhaps vascilating rapidly from dumping just enough extra supply on the market to crash prices, to shutting off supply to throw competing industrialists into chaos.
Obviously, this would mean that viewing these investments as reacting to "market forces" would fail to predict any potential geopolitical upheaval...
My personal opinion is that China has some time to run with their current strategy, perhaps until Lynas, MCP and GWM can bring sufficient production capacity on line to at least fill the ex-China market demand (which would be perhaps 30-40kmt per year, though there is an expectation that this is understated and may rapidly grow).
http://engt.co/zuO5bN
Recycling for most of the critical rare earths is just too expensive, and the recovery rate is often very low (un-marrying the various manufactured components is a losing proposition).
I see this whole issue coming to a race right down to the wire between shutting down home market factories and moving them to China - or laying on new and reliable sources of supply in 2012.
Most of the heavy users in Japan, Korea, Germany, Taiwan, etc. are very secretive about their sources for supplies and any stockpiles they might possess. By the time we hear that they are throwing in the towel and moving to Beijing, it could come as a big shock. China already has captured about 60-70% of the planet's manufacturing which requires rare earths, including some key gains amid Japan's highest technology users and their research and development resources. We are in the final stages of the geopolitical game, and the stakes literally involve world domination, and not just in an industrial or economic sense.
The only benefit I can see from that process is to support their cartel as it consolidates and becomes less efficient as a side-effect of being monopolistic and large in a centrally-planned environment. But it would eventually mean that they no longer could meet their own needs, much less attract manufacturers. ISTM that they would rather have a reliable supply from *anywhere* to support on-going manufacturing within China, which stills enjoys some economic advantages relative to cost of manufacturing.
Did I miss something? They are long-term planners, right?
HardToLove
You are correct that "long term" they would have to increase available supplies ex-China IF the junior miners somehow found sufficient financial support to continue operating in a non-profit environment, but that prospect is both very risky and difficult to equate with the likely competence of the various governments involved.
If I am correct (and I am just speculating, of course) China is currently ACCIDENTALLY walking that fine line just because some very small players are selling off their tiny stores of rare earths. This demonstrates how sensitive the situation really is to supply shifts, and how little is needed to trash the business opportunities for new startups in the West.
In the end, its important to see that for China, rare earths are a means to an end, NOT a "profit center". Government operated Cartels (just like governments everywhere) will do what they are told, profits be damned, and go after the geopolitical goals which are far more important than minor efficiencies within a staged commodity sector.
China's plans for rare earths have a surface layer that is all about environmental and safety concerns, the rule of law, and WTO maneuvering... I would strongly suggest looking well below that surface layer before investing in this sector.
Backing Lynas, MCP or GWM against the giant dragon holds risks which run well beyond any ginned-up environ-nonsense in Malaysia, or ex-China markets where world price discovery is controlled by plus or minus a few kilograms of metal available for sale.
The Western governments have left their corporate citizens vulnerable once again, despite mouthing millions of meaningless (but supportive sounding) words. The ball is in their court. Japan and Korea have the right idea, you have to create and maintain a large stockpile of critical materials if you don't want to be little more than a Chinese puppet on a string.
HardToLove
AELB gave Lynas nod for share in revenue, court papers claim
ouch. That is quite a claim. Let's hope that is not true.
This Conflict of Interest claim seems very weak to me. I see this type of research funding all of the time.
Research money is like a royalty or a commodity tax. The key Conflicts points are:
-Is it common in the over 1000 AELB approvals in the past to include this type of payment? The more common it is, the less likely the conflict claim has a chance.
and
-Is the tax to the AELB agency and not for any individual's personal gain? If individual members of AELB could convert the money for their personal gain there would be a conflict. If it is only for the agencies future research, I doubt the Conflict claim would have a chance.
and
-Is there a research agreement and is it a violation of the Malaysian Federal Constitution. Zakaria fails to site to the constitution in his affidavit making the claim.
I think this judicial review and the injunction claim we will see after this action will fail quickly in light of the expert evidence saying LAMP is safe and the waste is a minimal radioactive concern. This waste is non-hazardous by international standards and very low radioactivity in Malaysia. The operation has be called safe by the Malaysian professors, the Malaysian scientists, the IAEA, AELB and the Cabinet. That's a lot of expert evidence in Lynas' favor.
There other people that hold Lynas on this board and I do wish them the best.
I would like to publicly withdraw from our bet. Not because I think I will lose but because, as you like to say, I am done with you. You are arrogant at best and a mean immature bully when things do not go your way and I wish no further interaction with you. Life is too short.
Don't bother replying to me in public or private.
I think Lynas and GW readers are smart enough to see things for themselves. Beyond that no need for me to comment.
Here is a link to that NY Times article entitled: “The Fear of a Toxic Rerun” by Keith Bradsher, published June 29, 2011. http://tinyurl.com/788...
Lets start off by asking who is Keith Bradsher? Keith Bradsher is the chief Hong Kong correspondent for the New York Times. Who, since 2002, has reported on events from greater China and Southeast Asia. I would think Mr. Bradsher must have a lot of contacts with the Chinese Government in order to do his job.
Now specifically consider the following two paragraphs from Mr. Bransher’s June 29 article:
---
“Malaysia had reason to be cautious in allowing Lynas to build the plant. Its last rare earth refinery, operated by the Japanese company Mitsubishi Chemical, is now one of Asia’s largest radioactive waste cleanup sites. That plant, on the other side of the Malay peninsula, closed in 1992 after years of sometimes violent demonstrations by citizens.”
“Despite the potential hazards, the Malaysian government was eager for investment by Lynas, even offering a 12-year tax holiday. The project is Australia’s largest investment in Malaysia, intended to produce $1.7 billion a year in rare earths, or nearly 1 percent of Malaysia’s entire economic output. Lynas agreed to pay 0.05 percent of the plant’s revenue each year to the Malaysian Atomic Energy Licensing Board for radiation research.”
---
Notice anything strange about the last sentence in the second paragraph? First, it appears out of context. Second, and more importantly, what is the source for that - .05 percent of revenue payment - to the Malaysian AELB?
Here is the NY Times policy on sourcing:
=====
Confidential News Sources Policy
Readers of The New York Times demand to know as much as possible about where we obtain our information and why it merits their trust. For that reason, we have long observed the principle of identifying our sources by name and title or, when that is not possible, explaining why we consider them authoritative, why they are speaking to us and why they have demanded confidentiality.
Guidance on limiting the use of unidentified sources, and on informative description of those we do use, has appeared in several editions of our stylebook, including the current one, and in our Integrity Statement, dating from 1999. http://tinyurl.com/l29btk
---
Mr. Bransher’s report that .05 percent of revenues will be paid to the Malaysian AELB is not sourced. Nor does he say the source was confidential. Based on the NY Times own Confidential News Sources Policy, the statement appears to violate both the intent and spirit of that policy.
If you look at a current lawsuit being filed against Lynas, you will see there are allegations, based on that un-sourced statement by Mr. Bransher alleging that the 0.05 percent of the plant’s revenue each year to the Malaysian AELB was actually a payoff. A Quid pro quo for the granting of the temporary operating permit.
The NY Times should be taken to task for allowing an un-sourced statement to be published in apparent violation of its’ own Confidential News Sources Policy. I think this raises a valid question with respect to the accuracy of several of the other issues raised in Mr Bradsher's article.
Assuming LAMP might one day produce a value-added yearly income of $1billion, that would mean they were paying $500,000 to the Malaysian government. Not really a lot of money in the scheme of things.
Also, are fees/taxes like this really that unusual, even if the unsubstantiated report is true?
Frankly, similar nibbles are extracted by governments from projects right here in the US of A, if one but checks. Will the State of California seek money for fees, licenses and taxes from MolyCorp? LOL, anyone who doubts it needs to recheck their assumptions.
BUT...
Am I shocked that the NYT doesn't play by even its own set of rules?
No.
The ends justify the means, and they get to determine the ends before they write the "means".
Kudos.
Just to add to the Keith Bradsher resume. He is the reporter that also brought us the story on Moly's HREE deposit before Moly even had government permission to drill. This guy apparently does not treat all of these stocks the same IMO.
http://nyti.ms/pYnatW
Much of the talk will revolve around Phoenix construction updates. There has been some progress since the last CC, so we can expect quite a bit on that topic. Whether they will stick with the "on time and on budget" mantra I could not say... Given that the idea was that they were going to greatly accelerate the timetable, this becomes a potentially surreal conversation at some point (maybe this time, but it could get kicked down the road again).
I would expect some preliminary information about their mysterious HREE project as well.
Could they have finally netted all the permits they need for the NG line? Either way, I would expect this to be a topic... If the NG pipeline is still inert, we might hear about some alternatives they may be considering.
Needless to say we will hear a full review of rare earth oxide prices and how this is impacting them. I would expect really good news from Estonia, if I am reading the tea leaves of the way they have positioned feedstock in prior quarters there. If the news from eastern europe (which disappointed last quarter) shows a 2nd consecutive falter, this could be noteworthy.
press release
Feb. 21, 2012, 7:00 a.m. EST
Molycorp to Launch Sequential Start-up of New, State-of-the-Art Rare Earth Manufacturing Facility This Week
1100 member construction crew is now on site? I wonder how long ago that number was a LOT smaller... Perhaps we will now see the aggressive effort needed to hit Phase 1 nameplate production by September...
No sign of what the new dilution money is going to be spent on in that announcement, though, so I think Smith left himself some goodies to add this Thursday during the CC.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has published its findings and orders with an Order Issuing Certificate about Kern River Gas Transmission Company's proposal to build the gas pipeline lateral from their main transmission line to the mine.
Discussions about this and that including the environmental reviews are described on pages 3 through 22.
The orders are described on pages 22 and 23.
The orders appendices are detailed on pages 24 through 29.
It is noted that five outside organizations will be allowed to intervene in the pipeline's development. That may have some bearing on the Implementation Plan and the Plan's weekly status reports, the revised Reclamation Plan, and the actual pipeline construction.
http://1.usa.gov/xpTh0C
No wonder Molycorp is relying on the LNG stopgap.
I see your point in general. I guess the next investor question is how long can we estimate it will take to do all of this? I mean LNG versus the gas pipeline is a big difference in margins IMO. Yes, Moly will benefit long term just by getting to reliable supply and preserving cash flow. But LNG to Mountain Pass is not cheap.
One thing about the LNG rig (you can't just store LNG in a propane tank, it needs special containers and handling to keep it cold), it gives MCP a long term backup plan for the future when the pipeline is finished.
Perhaps, most important is the current Moly approach shows a real effort and commitment to get things up and running. If the idea does not work the nay sayers will say same ole Moly. But I'd say the idea and effort is a practical and positive step either way. Even if it is not cost effective, customers should love the effort. I guess the only concern would be bottlenecks and commissioning when Phoenix is fully done.
"Perhaps, most important is the current Moly approach shows a real effort and commitment to get things up and running." ~ Hmmm, I can't help but wonder why the big change of perspective all of a sudden. You think it might be inspired by the combination of Lynas' coming online very shortly and the class-action suit they're facing?
It may well be that they also have an eye on those lawsuits, which can be rendered largely moot if they get off the dime.
1100 construction workers would jibe with my idea that the only way they could meet their goal was to have several crews working on various aspects of Phoenix simultaneously. The most recent pictures don't really show this sort of action (any overview should look like a scene of mass chaos, as equipment and workers swarm over 3 or 4 different worksites simultaneously, and trucks laden with supplies and equipment are lined up waiting to deliver).
Perhaps they needed the cash infusion from the recent dilution to get the ball rolling...
This acceleration of Phoenix is something I like (aside from the obvious reasons) because it agrees with my view that the ex-China customers for rare earths are getting REALLY antsy. The brief flurry of additional loose metal and oxides that rolled into the markets after the Cartel put the squeeze on the little guys in China was enough to lower spot pricing, but fell far short of delivering the sort of plenty needed to refill depleted stockpiles. The ex-China rare earth consumers may have gained a few months of time before their warehouses read "empty", but now they are once again in a race between their level of consumption and their supplies. This would mean many phone calls to MCP pushing them to hit their promises and get the supplies rolling...
Should MolyCorp end up delivering product BEFORE Lynas, I will just have to shake my head in wonder at the mistake of building the LAMP in one of the few countries outside mainland China which is so utterly compromised by Chinese influence.
I suspect they will bump up Silmet's capacity, perhaps in a big way, and it could be that they have located some source(s) of feedstock for Silmet, particularly niobium (and maybe MolyMet will enter into that equation now, as well)...
Either that or Moly sees the drop in Ce and La prices making positive cash flow impossible without Phoenix. And no doubt Sumitomo told them "promises are not enough". All the same I applaud the Moly creativity and effort.
Lynas being further or less behind than Moly is not the key point to me. I'm sure I'll hold Lynas well past Moly being on line. Lynas (and Moly for that matter) are and must be prepared for each others production. And long term, because of the Chinese/Japanese issues you discussed above, their mutual production can aid each other as ROW pioneers.
But I would like to see this work. And I'd like to see the lawyers get it wrong as much as the next guy. But if Moly pulls this off you'd have to admire the grit. It would make them seem more like a miner and less like hedgies to me. Good luck Moly. Get 'er done.
Australia says no to Lynas waste....
http://bit.ly/xuXYkv
This company has made several smart moves and is progressing well. There is still a lot to do but they have held there timeline well and continue to move forward. They now belong in a first mover discussion and have a strong resource with full processing plans. I don't own them yet, but I will when they are closer to production.
Frontier has a key alliance with South Korea, and that is something which I should have mentioned in the past (I think I did, but maybe not). This puts them in my top 10 (yep, that conversation back when was where we listed our top picks, and I included Frontier because of the SK link).
Its so easy to get consumed by happenings with the front runners and lose sight of the little guys coming up on the outside lane...
Arafura had an announcement today, they are trying for another fund raising ($12million or so). We'll see if this one goes better than the last catastrophic effort...
adequate financing so far,
the preliminary economic assessment is positive,
the resource is meant for open pit extraction,
good infrastructure with a modern paved highway
to the nearest industrial seaport,
not much in the way of environmental problems,
a logical joint venture with the Koreans, and
the stock has stabilized at a lower level.
If South African politics remain supportive of mining,
that would be a plus.
http://bit.ly/yA9CHX
The new Concentrator is ready for new concentration...
999999999999999999999999
9999999999999999999
Latest Followers
StockTalks
-
SIlver. (FRMSF.PK) up 8.50%, (SLW) up 7.16%, (GPRLF.PK) up 11.83%. Also (PLG) up 6.19% for the platinum group.
Nov 4, 2010
-
Conviction picks this week: (NVAX) and (NATUF.PK).
Oct 24, 2010
-
(GDLNF.PK) Penny stock with a "zero tolerance" Uranium policy problem in Greenland. Local politics control. RISKY. Just bought shares.
Aug 16, 2010
More »Latest Comments
Most Commented
Posts by Themes