mnm v esi

I think there was a call for this by a poster so lets start a new thread that is focused on the particular topic.

This is really a topic on Exergen v ECT as MNM is simply the company that has allowed Exergen via the 50/50 JV to source supplies for their process.

Supply Partners - MNM and Callejas v Loy Yang
Offtake Partners - Tata v Tincom
Investment Partners - Thiess v La Jolla Cove
Location - Bacchus Marsh v Latrobe Valley
OPEX - ?? v $45pt
CAPEX - ?? v $100pt

Can someone fill the gaps on this??

In my oversimplified view of the key challenges for this industry, each company needs to focus their efforts on 1) CAPEX and OPEX, 2) Supply Agreements, 3) Offtake Partners and 4) Proximity to port and rail.....financiers will be a function of the quality of 1-4.

My cursory view is, ECT wins on the supply partner side, lose out slightly on the offtake partners, MNM are closer to Geelong but not sure of rail spurs nearby that connect directly to geelong, but estimate that ECT are probably closer to a lot more developed transport infrastructure.

ECT's biggest problem is its CAPEX per tonne and without knowledge of Exergens equivalent CAPEX its hard to say whos in front there.

Exergen's and MNM's biggest problem it would seem is that it will be a very difficult process to acheive a mining develoment licence for a 1-2B tonee reserve in the heart of broader Melbourne's growth corridor. It took Yallourn Energy at least 5 years to have an extension granted to their existing mining licence and they are within a zoned mining area. Whilst the mine exists at Bacchus Marsh and the licence to extract is obviously granted, the operations would be sub commercial for the usage that Exergen envisage and I dont think that they will develop this mine inside of 10years if at all.

And all of that is just my opinion.

I'd love to hear others.