Thanks, N. I hear you.
I think the single biggest problem stems from the fact that POS was formed (actually a re-jigging of Niagara) back at the peak of the 2007 Ni boom. Right from the start it appears to have been geared up with senior-level capabilities that were based on the promise of what might happen -- on what they originally envisaged the company would do. But the Ni market had other ideas and headed south, fundamentally impacting the economics of getting Windarra (the only meaningful asset until 2015) up and running. From 2007 onward it's been a long-term story of constantly being behind the eight-ball due to the problems with the economics of being able to make it (Windarra) work, coupled with (spec on my part) internal rose-coloured optimism that next year will be better.
Today, however, things are objectively different. Different enough to make a beneficial difference to SHers? Don't know yet. It's worth remembering that the BS and LJ complexes were both purchased at the bottom of the cycle (the polar opposite of where today's POS started with Windarra in 2007) and there is potential for them to prove to be very good purchases in the fullness of time. There were adjustments made to the executive overhead during the Nuclear Winter, but that appears to be because it was either that or close the doors. This was the
laundromat era, which I think you've been around long enough to be very familiar with. Retaining MR was, imo, a misstep because much (not all) of the reporting problems stemmed from there. Today, two of the three current Board members are new blood. The management executive is also undergoing a refresh, with the new full-time CFO/CoSec due to commence next week and a search for a replacement CEO underway.
Will all of this make any difference? Well, yes and maybe, imo. Firstly, we fundamentally need a project which can generate revenue (what a novel idea...duh). And today... for the... first... time... since 2007... we can genuinely say that we have at least one in the form of the BS complex (LJ should also be economic right now, but we can only do one thing at a time). Let's pause to let that sink in for a moment. So, yes, I think the current economics of BS can certainly make a difference. However, we also need the right people who are very capable and not error-prone, for starters. This is the 'maybe' element and it's too earlier to tell at this stage, but hopefully the new leadership (Board and eventual executive) will be able to get the mix right. I'm confident our mine manager at BS is right (credit to RD for securing him), as he was the mine manager for IGO's Long mine immediately before it's C&M mothballing.
Just in case what I've written above has settled you a bit, have a read of PAN's detailed 2017 Savannah restart feasibility study announcement (
link) and preso (
link) and contrast that with the level of detail that we were presented with in our
2018 BS DFS, which included the erroneous elements.
(In the interests of balance, it's worth mentioning that I've been told that a
great deal of behind-the-scenes prep work that it not readily visible to the naked eye has already been done (i.e. scoping, costing work, contract prep, etc, etc...), which apparently should payoff when the restart decision is finally made. Time will tell.)
They say the past is a different planet. Let's hope this one has a more suitable atmosphere...
Cheers,
Z
(20min delay)