ASM Chart Thread, page-9064

I mean does ARU really have a superior mine? I'm having a look at the Nolans Project Update dated 11 November 2022 and some of the assumptions are ridiculous compared to ASM's Dubbo Optimisation Study. Dubbo is much more conservative with exchange rates, product pricing and cashflows, and despite that it still has a better IRR.

Take NdPr oxide of 75% Nd and 25% Pr. For the Life of Mine prices ASM uses US$103.65 per kilo while ARU uses US$130 and that's their base case scenario with 19.3% Post-Tax IRR compared to ASM 20.1% Post-Tax IRR.

ASM uses $0.75 exchange rate while ARU uses 0.71

Also lets look at cashflows. The Dubbo Project uses Free Cash Flow which includes taxes and comes to AUD$425m per annum, while ARU uses EBITDA which does not include taxes and comes to AUD$573 per annum. However, according to ARU NdPr represents 89% of their revenue, so if we use USD$103.65 for NdPr prices, their EBITDA (including HRE and p2o5) comes to AUD$ 471m per annum, but we still have to deduct 30% corporate tax from that revenue and it would come to AUD$330m per annum

So to summarize, ASM's Dubbo Project costs AUD$ 1.68b capex and has a FCF of AUD$425m per annum. While ARU's Nolans Project costs AUD$1.59b capex and has a FCF of AUD$330m per annum.

Everything I've stated comes from Dubbo Project Optimisation Delivers Strong Financials dated 7 December 2021 and NOLANS PROJECT UPDATE dated 11 November 2022. Feel free to correct me if I've screwed up.