If people want to have an understanding, I guess commence with this post first as on these threads numbers are just branded about - I tried to do a valuation a while back in this Post #:55657563
The key is the table in that post because if you did a similar exercise for AVZ and LTR and others, you'll find on the published data SYA has a lower NPV and a lower resource level and hence perceived minelife than a comparison to some of those entities in your table them, This does not mean that further resources will not be discovered and obviously configuration can change for SYA based on the NAL acquisition itself as well as product like producing a higher valued downstream hydroxide product than just selling spodumene, and that is what I think the market is currently starting to think about and price hence the upward SP movement of late too.
LTR and AVZ are proposing to also produce downstream chemicals as well, PLS wants to but time will tell for it. SYA is well placed here as well, and ultimately even having a smaller resource than the others is irrelevant in party IMO if you can produce hydroxide and stay within DFS parameters when released etc etc.
Then go to this post as I gave a view on what SP I would be happy with before we rerate which is the SP currently SYA is at : Post #:55658783
Clearly right now compared to those in the table SYA is fairly priced market cap wise IMO when assessed against those peers, but I suspect the revised financial data here and configuration will surprise to the upside IMO. When that comes out I suspect there will be a upward rerate here IMO IMO against peers. As well as the market coming to a view that SYA will be in production say this side of 2025 or when (a key)???? The longer the market says you are away from production (or when you hit your nameplate capacity that adversely influences MC IMO
The other aspect is where one is at in the production phase - I think you'll find the market is starting to price some of the exploration plays away from NPV towards a transition of NPV and nominal metrics of EPS and P/E ratios (i.e. they assume those projects will get to production) - i.e. my gut feel is the market is pricing AVZ and LTR as if they are çertainties to be in production this side of 2025). Obviously PLS is in production so is been priced on nominal EPS as against NPV valuations or comboination of NPV and nominal EPS metrics, so where the market perceives you are in the "moving into production"" window influences market cap IMO IMO. Take CXO, the market in effect IMO is pricing them in production than on NPV basis IMO.
They are just my thoughts - if others have a differing view please share, as I suspect the key to Market Cap is i.) initial NPV, ii.) then revised NPV as project scope expands etc iii.) when the market transitions from a NPV valuation to an assumption they see you getting to production and by what date and then v.) in production. Obvipously in production your SP is influenced by nominal EPS and P/E ratios and actually hitting your DFS targets etc. A ket to valuations is assumed profit/cash flow and that is influenced by mine life, your resource availability, grade of ore, impurities in the ore which translate to production costs etc etc as well obviously capex costs etc etc. Mapping these provides a better basis to possibly forming that view, but indicatively I think SYA isfairly priced relating to the others on what we know which leverages of the previous DFS - will be better priced as metrics improve, scope is expanded and the market belives we will be in production by x date and the market believes we will be able to efficiently utilise the NAL assets etc etc . currently I also think the market is also pricing in a bigger configuration for SYA as per my earlier posts of this evening.
Just a guess and All IMO but hopefully this post might get some perspectives happening etc etc. Haven't posted here for while but if this post helps debate that will be good.
All IMO and a VB downed. Anyway posted enough and will take a break now again.
If the posts generates discussion that will be good and all the above is IMO
Anyway for comparisons here is a post I put in a peer comparisons thread a while ago and posted quite a lot in that thread for those interested: Post #:52508425
(20min delay)