It's a bit more complicated than that though isn't it.
I wouldn't be surprised if the $20M funding didn't have clauses associated with maintaining Development Consent (particularly when funding was issued whilst Silver Mines were defending the appeal). Regardless, assuming Bowdens keeps the $20M and deploys it strictly at regaining Development Consent, there's a real chance that the costs and length of the approval timeframe will outlast the funding and force Bowdens into bankruptcy. It's very hard for a project with as much risk, controversy and adverse media attention as Bowdens does to obtain funding without approval or a clear plan for approval...
There is currently no timeline or even clear pathway to regain Consent. There is a high likelihood that regaining development consent will be lengthy, mainly for 2 reasons:
1. All considerations for the 66kV route/s are problematic. There are key landholders on all routes that are opposed to the development. To exhaust all avenues of reasonable landholder negotiations prior to the use of legal force for access is time consuming. Then add the legal timeframe to the back end of that process. All of which needs to be done prior to the route being able to be assessed for environmental impact and packaged into the revised EIS...
2. The EIS itself. If it was just the powerline that needed to be added for resubmission that's one thing. However, there's a very high likelihood that all consultancy reports will need to be overhauled as they are now too old and not reflective of current baseline data. The updated baseline data may also present complications for the IPC assessment and subsequent management plans due to the last 3.5 years of high rainfall.
Potentially another significant problem is the stakeholder statistics if community surveys are to be updated. The local community was very supportive of the project in 2016 due to a recent closure of a local coal mine. They were fearful of jobs and assumed the Silver Mine was just silver. Cut to present day, local employment is high, local coal mines cannot hire enough workers and all have staffing shortfalls. Combine that with the effective campaign from MRAG surrounding the, some actually genuine, environmental and health concerns of the Mine. The stats are highly unlikely to show the same level of support that the did previously...
Bowdens can't afford (literally) for a long and drawn out approvals process but unfortunately that looks like that's what's about to happen. The costs associated with just the powerline easement, landholder access, legal costs, EIS revision costs, on-going monitoring, and maintaining company payroll appear to be greater than the current cash position. And even if they did manage to limp a revised EIS over the line, there's a real possibility that the IPC rejects it regardless of the critical minerals (plus who knows what the critical minerals list will do over the next 3 years, there's currently a high demand for silver but who really knows what directly that'll take).
Potentially the high silver price and state critical minerals may bolster share holder and investor confidence but at this stage holding SLV appears to be nothing more than a low odds, low return gamble... If you like silver, I suggest you invest directly in silver.
My opinions only. Do your own research. Not financial advice.
Expand
(20min delay)