Nickel Price Outlook, page-80

"Nickel should currently be worth $AU27,000/t at historical Ni/Cu ratios."

Are you able to present the underpinning analysis?

Ratios jump around all the time. I guess what I'm trying to say is that this idea that "x" should (<- keyword) be worth "$y" because of a historical ratio sounds pretty simplistic to me. Speaking in absolutes always is! (<- see what I did there?)

When measured against the broader context that the Ni industry has been suffering from a massive supply hangover (FA metrics) that was the direct by-product of the huge Ni bull market that kicked on ~2003, then it's not at all surprising that the NP is nowhere near $AU27,000/t and hasn't been for quite a while. Are those FA metrics improving? Yes, most certainly. And when they improve well enough, the NP might just get to $AU27,000/t. But it won't happen because a ratio prophecized it. It will happen because the FA conditions allowed it to (imo). That said, we can agree that historical ratios can be useful (but not written in stone - hence the uncertainty) in giving us an idea to what might happen.

So on the one hand one poster is saying that, based on some TA of historical ratios, Ni should be AU$x/t, whereas another poster is suggesting that it's easily explainable by looking at the underlying FA that the int'l Ni market has been experiencing.

You can throw "learned" around willy nilly, but I'd be much more interested to see an analysis that argues why Ni could be worth $AU27,000/t. There's a world of difference between "should" and "could".