27c valued at 234c before upgrade next friday?, page-75

hotwolf, you're a bit out of line giving Devander a serve. Not that he's got all his facts straight, but to sort you both out;

Capex here is unlikely to get to $800M like Nolans. For a start, ARU is attempting to produce 3 or 4 product streams; refined uranium oxide, rare earth oxide, phosphoric acid, and chlorides. The phosphatic acidification bit of their plant, alone, is about 25% of the capex.

GGG, on current information, is looking at producing a concentrate via phosphate flotation; this concentrate of phosphositilcate will then be solubilised and a HREE and LREE pruduct stream sold out without refining.

However, if they do aim to make this run on uranium alone, you're looking at a 10Mtpa operation, which would probably capitalise at around US$250M in temperate/arid lands, so we might need to add 50% for the arctic conditions in Greenland. So, what, US$350M? Uranium mineralogy tends to be pretty simple to treat in these bulk tonnage alkaline intrusives.

Even US$350M is a hefty ask for a company with a $50M market capitalisation. But consider EXT had around a $1.2Bn capitalisation a few weeks ago, and although that deposit has nearology and Rio Tinto takeover speculation, Devander is wrong that GGG's market cap has a lot of expectation built in. That was when it was $2. But Cunninghams is doing no one any favours claiming it should be worth $3.30+ and no one here has found a better way of supporting a $1+ share price for GGG except by reference to in ground value, which is ridiculous.

Consider this. If GGG is worth $3.33 on IGV now, with perhaps a 100% upgrade in resources due out within 4 to 6 weeks, will it be worth $6.66 after the JORC comes out? If they have drilled only 10% of the intrusion as some suggest, does that mean when they drill the other 90% out they will be worth $66.60? Poppycock.

If you value a company on the rate at which it repays you, then GGG would need to have the capacity to pay $6 a year divs. IGV is a stupid, amateurish way for nincumpoops like Cunninghams who have no idea of geology or metallurgy or the mining process to value companies because an accountant will treat an ore body as an asset, and value that asset according to what's in it. Like its a bank vault. Problem is, you have to build the bank vault (by selling shares and taking on debt risk) and then it costs you about 60% of the value of whats in the vault to take something out of the vault, and you can only take out so much money at any one time. Sure, you can have a vault the size of a skyscraper but if you can only pull $120M a year from it at a time, its not going to get your share price up beyond a earnings multiple on that $120M pa. So, that's what will limit the price of GGG - after a while, it wont matter how many tonnes of dirt GGG finds. 5 billion, 30 billion tonnes, who cares if you can only mine 10Mt pa?

Secondly, Greenland is still not a guaranteed uranium-friendly jurisdiction. There are still significant political loopholes to jump through, and here I will point out that villiaumite (NaF) is toxic in the environment, and is water soluble so you have to consider there might be a few issues with tailings storage and transport of the NaF concentrates (think Esperance lead debacle).

You claim that olympic Dam is complex. That is bull cakes. OD is as simple as it gets. A hel of a lot more simple than a deposit where they can't name all the minerals in the deposit; a deposit hosted within fairly benign rock full of inert gangue which doesn't include toxic minerals and which produces a readily saleable concentrate (copper sulphide). If you compare Kvanefjeld to OD you merely expose yourself as more ignorant than Devander.