@GCarI don't even know where to start, but here it goes.
"Hilarious claims and accusations being thrown around; left, right and centre. From “no progress” etc all the way up to “the company breaching disclosure requirements”; the list is long and amusing."No-one has said "no progress" or "the company breaching disclosure requirements". You are yet again making statements up and exaggerating for effect in order to rally your supporters. You love a good straw-man argument, and you don't miss a chance to disappoint.
"AFAIK, operationally speaking, all responsibility and accountability for the Rincon project lies with Puna Mining S.A."I disagree, but let's explore your logic. If Puna Mining/Pablo are responsible and accountable for the operation of the Rincon project, then logically all credit lies with them too. But yet again you're trying to have it both ways. If JZ isn't accountable/responsible, he doesn't get the credit. Which brings me to your next point....
"AFAIK, the role that AGY plays in this JV is predominately linked to the funding of the company, via the listing of AGY on the ASX"The only real deliverable from AGY over the past twelve months has been the completion of plant construction and progression of commissioning. But remember, you're attributing these responsibilities to Pablo, so JZ doesn't get the credit. Now, if AGY/JZ's responsibility is just the funding, how's the offtake going? How's the strategic investment going? What about the application process for the EIA? What about Tonopah?
"Imo anyone claiming that the progress of the operation, or perceived lack of, is solely or even significantly the responsibility of JZ is kidding themselves."It's right here in Argosy's Board Charter that JZ's role includes the day-today management of Argosy's operations (that includes the Rincon Project). Of course the progress of the operation is significantly his responsibility, he's the Managing Director!
"Funny how some traders return now and then, trying to time a run on expected news, and then complain and feed endless FUD when their plan goes wonky."How should we describe your endless down ramping on the LKE threads (where you don't even hold)? I guess that's not FUD, you're just saving them from themselves? I call it massive hypocrisy.
"Seems to me like we need to focus more on likely earnings potential, rather than the overdone fearmongering"Sure, let's do that. Current pricing looks to be around USD$32,000 per tonne. OPEX was estimated at USD$4645 in 2018, so I think we can safely round up to USD$5000 per tonne. That leaves a profit margin of USD$27,000. But then we need to account for a portion of technical grade, so maybe knock off $1k and we're at a margin of USD$26,000.
Now I'll be generous and assume that AGY can achieve north of 90% of nameplate, so I'll give them 1,500 Tpa (based on 77.5% project share). 1500 Tpa x USD$26,000 = USD$39 million EBITDA per year, but for ease of calculations I'll round up to $USD40m per year. That's obviously before tax, ongoing working capital needs, royalties, etc.
Now, we've still got to pay for the 10 ktpa expansion. You've previously estimated that CAPEX could be around USD$240m, so let's use that. 240/40 = 6. That's six years of EBITDA to pay for the 10 ktpa expansion. Or in other words, when accounting for ongoing CAPEX, no free cash flow until the 2030's.
