Seeking Alpha

Sarcastic Processor

Sarcastic Processor
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Sarcastic Processor's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Molycorp Seeks More Oaktree Debt - Kicking The Can Down The Road? [View article]
    Well, does your broker offer a money-back guarantee?

    Anyhow, you can get some of your money back, even if a small percentage, if you sell now.
    Mar 31, 2015. 07:18 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Earnings Preview - 3 Key Items [View article]
    In the case of MCP earnings report dates, Yahoo is about 0% accurate prior to company announcement of the date. Molycorp has not yet announced a date. Comprende?
    Mar 3, 2015. 07:25 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Earnings Preview - 3 Key Items [View article]
    SE, did you even bother to read what the few sites which had them "announcing" today said? March 2 was an estimate, labeled as such on at least some of the sites. They may have all gotten the estimate in turn from a single "source". Molycorp's earnings report was not delayed because it never said it was going to be March 2. Every Q, there are always estimated dates by 3rd parties, and they are always wrong. Molycorp has always issued a PR announcing the date of earnings release and call several days or weeks before the actual event.

    Anyhow, when the magic date comes, let's see how much of the "increased" production was LREC, and how the market reacts to that.
    Mar 2, 2015. 10:06 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Nearly Triples On Higher Production Volume - Too Bad It's Ethereal [View article]
    You have misunderstood my post. The question is not how much of each rare earth element is in LREC, it is how much of the production is LREC vs. separated rare earth oxides. LREC is an intermediate product, produced from the first phase of procesing. To produce separated rare earth oxides (or the Neodymium/Praseodymium mixture didymium) requires separation to be performed on the LREC concentrate, which costs money, and may present a challenge for a plant which is not yet operating well.

    So LREC is an easier, and cheaper to produce product, of lower value, than separated rare earth oxides. Project Phoenix was supposed to produce separated rare earth oxides, not LREC. So LREC production I think is an underhanded way of making production look higher than it really is, and costs look lower than they really are. But the piper is paid in the form of lower price received per kg and/or cost shifted downstream if Molycorp separates the LREC at another facility (such as Neo in China).
    Feb 13, 2015. 08:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Nearly Triples On Higher Production Volume - Too Bad It's Ethereal [View article]
    Where's the LREC braekdown?

    I am surprised that the Shock Exchange did not pick up on the fact that Molycorp's increased "production" includes LREC (Light Rare Earth Concentrate), but no information was provided as to the percentage of production which is LREC, and how that compares with previous periods. Especially since the Sarcastic Processor mentioned that in a comment on the Shock Exchange's previous MCP article.

    I am guessing that the percentage of production which was LREC will come out in the 2014 Q4 earnings/call, and might well have gone up significantly, in which case not all analysts will be pleased.

    LREC skips the expensive and difficult separation step, which was supposed to be the whole idea of Project Phoenix, and therefore saves "production" costs at Mountain Pass, but results in a much lower value product than separated rare earths. So there will be some combination of low price per kg for LREC and/or production cost to be incurred by downstream facilities (Neo in China perhaps) at a later date.

    Aside from bamboozling people with misleading production figures, the "good thing" about LREC production is that it apparently counts towards Molycorp's Mountain Pass production requirements to get the additional tranche of Oaktree financing (did they realize the loophole they were providing?).
    Feb 13, 2015. 01:52 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Will Molycorp Be Delisted? [View article]
    Any guesses on how much of the production increase was LREC, which is only "pseudo-production"? My guess is that LREC has increased as a percentage of Mountain Pass "production", which would kind of be "cheating", even though it apparently counts toward Oak Tree production requirements for Molycorp to access additional funding.
    Feb 5, 2015. 07:33 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Will Molycorp Be Delisted? [View article]
    "Then wouldn't it be safe to assume Molycorp would be the place Panasonic would get their product for manufacturing?"

    No, it would not be safe. considering that the batteries Panasonic will make for Tesla don't use any rare earths. Other than that, brilliant thesis.
    Feb 1, 2015. 10:13 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp: After Q3 Cash Burn Of $48MM, Is S&P Upgrade Imminent? [View article]
    Well, I posted this before seeing this morning's 8-K announcing a debt for equity exchange. Don't know what that will do to S&P ratings assessment, but I suppose it might help (a little).
    Nov 21, 2014. 08:55 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp: After Q3 Cash Burn Of $48MM, Is S&P Upgrade Imminent? [View article]
    Since Oaktree financing closed over two months ago, and earnings were released over two weeks ago, if S&P were to upgrade, shouldn't it have done so by now, and if S&P decided not to upgrade, should it have, or has it already, removed Molycorp from CreditWatch?
    Nov 21, 2014. 08:27 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The Resources Segment Is Killing Molycorp [View article]
    Jack, as for your vaunted Rare Element Resources, which is listed on NYSE MKT (which is what used to be known as AMEX), it hasn't seen the north side of a buck, even intra-day, since September 12, and closed today at 56 U.S. cents per share.
    Nov 20, 2014. 07:17 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp: Will Q3 Results Trigger S&P Upgrade? [View article]
    Jack, you'll also be "happy" to know that Molycorp's $20 million investment in Boulder Wind Power, Inc. convertible preferred stock has now been written down to zero (it was written down to $12 million on Dec 31, 2013) per p. 29 of Molycorp 2014Q3 10Q http://1.usa.gov/1tKdqjI
    Nov 5, 2014. 10:21 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp: Will Q3 Results Trigger S&P Upgrade? [View article]
    Jack, are you at liberty to say which one? Is there a link?
    Nov 5, 2014. 09:39 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Plummets After Oaktree Discloses 9.1% Stake: Will Shares Recover? [View article]
    That 9.1% stake, such as it were, had already been revealed a week earlier on September 11, complete with pricing and other details.

    Anyhow go look back at my comments on Molycorp as far back as early 2011, to see what I thought of it then. That was back when you were but a rare earth babe in the woods.
    Oct 1, 2014. 01:55 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Plummets After Oaktree Discloses 9.1% Stake: Will Shares Recover? [View article]
    Ha ha, I knew you were going to dismiss it as irrelevant, and thought about mentioning that preemptively. It shows your lack of attention to detail and facts. That's not to say that the big picture is not important, but at least get facts correct, rather than playing fast and loose with them.

    Regardless, only 3/4 of the warrants are in the money, yet the stated percentage ownership and deemed beneficial ownership are based on all the warrants, including the 1/4 of them well out of the money at present.
    Oct 1, 2014. 01:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Molycorp Plummets After Oaktree Discloses 9.1% Stake: Will Shares Recover? [View article]
    You wrote "The company's shares outstanding increased from 244 million to 269 million. In effect, the strike price for Oaktree's warrants were so low that they were exercised immediately into additional shares."

    Did you actually read the 13G filed on September 18? There is no indication that Oaktree has actually exercised any warrants as of yet. On p. 2:

    "(2) All calculations of percentage ownership herein are based on a total of 269,250,948 shares of common stock of the Issuer, par value $0.001 per share (the “Common Stock”), outstanding, consisting of (i) 244,773,589 shares of Common Stock outstanding as of August 5, 2014, as disclosed in the Issuer’s Form 10-Q filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 6, 2014, (ii) 18,358,019 warrants to purchase Common Stock held by the Reporting
    Persons (as defined below), entitling them to purchase an aggregate of 18,358,019 shares of Common Stock of the Issuer at an exercise price of $0.01 per share, subject to expiration on September 11, 2019 (the “Penny Warrants”) and (iii) 6,119,340 warrants to purchase Common Stock held by the Reporting
    Persons, entitling them to purchase an aggregate of 6,119,340 shares of Common Stock of the Issuer at an exercise price of $2.04 per share, subject to
    expiration on September 11, 2019 (the “Oaktree Warrants” and together with the Penny Warrants, the “Warrants”). In accordance with Rule 13d-3(d)(1). the
    Warrants are treated as exercised for the purpose of computing the deemed beneficial ownership percentage of the Reporting Persons."

    Note the key sentence "In accordance with Rule 13d-3(d)(1). the
    Warrants are treated as exercised for the purpose of computing the deemed beneficial ownership percentage of the Reporting Persons." The 13G is in essence just a pro forma report.
    Oct 1, 2014. 08:46 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
216 Comments
265 Likes