Just found out something interesting when comparing TMT to TNG. The "Peer Comparison" table in the Spark report (page 8) gives the annual production of V2O5 as 12,800 tonnes for TMT (**ba), and 6000 tonnes for TNG.
Of course TNG is mining TiO2 and Fe2O3 too, and I calculated the forecast income split from the three minerals over the LOM as 29% (V2O5), 9% Fe2O3, and 62% Ti2O3. I was a bit surprised to see that TNG will derive most of its income from its titanium fraction. One could ask whether TNG will morph into mainly a TiO2 supplier with Vanadium and iron ore as bi-products ?
So to get more exposure to the Vanadium (and possible upside if the V2O5 price goes up), TMT seems to be a much better prospect that TNG, since TMT will have more than double the annual production of V2O5.
When you add in the recent additional income that could come initially from Yarrabubba, the financials for TMT look even better.
For example, the pre-production Capex for TNG is $824m compared to ~$450m for TMT (**ba), but TMT's capex could be ~$150m if done using Yarrabubba as the initial stepping stone, as has been suggested by others here.
Note too in the Spark report table that TMT's annual production of V2O5 (12,800t) will be the highest of all the V2O5 miners listed, the closest at 12,000t would be Largo Resources.
All IMHO, DYOR
TMT Price at posting:
35.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held