There is a serious lack of understanding by many here on the relationships between:
- Recovery Rates
- Final Product Specification
- Volume
Quite rightly LTR needs decent recovery rates, given the CAPEX and OPEX. Why drag it from an underground mine at huge cost to not draw out as much value as possible.
For specification the same. No point claiming high ESG credentials if you are not limiting the carbon footprint per Litha unit. Given they are shipping the spod further than any other operation on the planet. They need a low carbon footprint per Lithia unit.
As for volume. PLS has shown the best way to make serious coin $$$ is bank money on the high volume requirement parts of the cycle. Sell as many Lithia units as possible. WE ARE GONNA NEED A BIGGER BOAT!!
PLS plants are already operating above nameplate due to the spec and recovery, they can afford it. To compare them to LTR is an insult to PLS Management IMO.
ASX Today, page-39781
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 1,429 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add LTR (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
90.5¢ |
Change
-0.020(2.16%) |
Mkt cap ! $2.194B | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 91.0¢ | 93.5¢ | 89.0¢ | $26.09M | 28.68M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 7 | 472933 | 90.0¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 90.5¢ | 446423 | 6 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 28/06/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| LTR (ASX) Chart |