Hi All,As a longtime holder in Base and Image I’ve had an...

Hi All,
As a longtime holder in Base and Image I’ve had an occasional eye on Strandline. In the current mineral sands market I’m considering expanding my portfolio to include STA while it’s share price remains at these levels. The Coburn DFS numbers look attractive and the project delivery should be manageable given:

-Project is being executed by good companies that I know
-Fixed price contracts should limit cost overrun if they were spec’d properly.
-Low slimes and oversize should minimise commissioning risk.

The one thing that still concerns me however is the low 1.11% HM content. It is significantly lower than most other sand projects - the only comparable one that I know of is Grande Cote (the old MDL before it was bought out by Eramet). But that was still 1.4% HM and they used a dredge and floating concentrator to handle the higher sand flow rates. I just wonder how economical a dozer trap will be with Coburn.

Obviously this would have all been considered in the DFS and the numbers still turned out OK. However, it’s hard to be sure if optimistic input numbers have been used to help get things over the line. Plant mineral recoveries used in the DFS look pretty high - but that should have ben justified by their test work (of which I’m sure would have been extensive given the long history of Coburn under Gunston and now Strandline).

I’d really appreciate any further thoughts from others that would help resolve my concerns. Thanks.