The video is actually quite interesting, and apologies for this long winded dissection of the video whilst drinking VB, because too me:
1. Indicating AVL is working with conceptual plant design to ensure it understands the impact of weathering and grain size on magnetic separation and recovery ratios (i.e. the comment around 50 seconds mark and one revisited a few times in the presentation). In other words, it doesn't want the same issues as what happened at the nearby Windumarra plant all those years ago and is making sure assessing all options around the recovery rates and improving these (i.e. in the video AVL makes no apologies, and rightly so, for this aspect, which in part feed into the delay in releasing the PFS which I thought was due end June - see point 2 below - IMO IMO) . Refer to following posts if seeking more detail on this point 1: Post #:
32012815 and Post #:
32007649
2. Confirms that they intend to take the nickel, copper and cobalt during after the initial magnetic separation process (around 1.23 minute mark) - that is the waste at step 1 that contains the nickel, copper and cobalt is then further worked on to produce a one stage nickel/copper/cobalt concentrate in the process flow sheet (deemed to be credits - and this they refer to as 'tailings' in the process, not as the tailings we think of in mine waste terminology and storage at a mine, but these tailings are what is processed/treated to extract the copper/nickel/cobalt in that process flow sheet before finally what is left of the waste is then moved to what we define as 'tailings' in a mine site development plan, noting from recollection AVL are entitled to all the cobalt credits btw (but share the nickel/copper credits with another player). These credits will be used to reduce the cost of production of AVL - very similar to what PLS is doing with its tantalite in its lithium project, and yes I know different industry). I gave some views a while ago on this as well in this post: Post #:
34155612
3. The fact is AVL intends to release a PFS with scoping options (my interpretation of discussion starting at 2.30 minute mark) - Pre Feasibility Study- first (which is more of a scoping study by the looks of it in the now, meaning later this month/early Asgust) and then do further analysis to determine which option best provides value here (the DFS - Definitive Feasibility Study - later this year/early 2019 they then refer to). The other part here is the PFS will have a 'base case' as well, meaning IMO IMO IMO the DFS will investigate the feasibility of the base case and then assess/cost other options etc etc in finalising a development scenario here for the subsequent later this year DFS outcomes. I also suspect having a base case will allow AVL to go to market to deal with funding/Offtake Agreement issues from August to say December which then also form the basis of the DFS. The key is AVL is looking at developing a long life mine here - beyond 20 years - so obviously the missing ingredient in the presentation is that AVL probably will need to prove up further reserves for that goal IMO. A key comment again in this section 2 minute mark comments is 'understanding the ore body' (refer point 1 above). (The subsequent comments at the 5.40 - 6.00 minute mark IMO iMO IMO need to be read in the context of this point 2 because just looking at then separately to the earlier comments can be confusing).
4. Comment at 3.20 on strike length very interesting and refer point around long life mine life within point 3 above. 92 mt in the current measured/indicated/inferred high grade category as well. The comment around 11km of strike length very interesting and refer to point 3 above - means ongoing drilling program etc to ensure mine life meets the20 plus year mine life proposedIMO IMO IMO. (What is not stated IMO in the video - and relating to point 3 above - is need further data to move the inferred to the measured and indicated category as ultimately it is measured and indicated resources that form the basis of an investment decision, meaning the hard resource numbers is what will be in the DFS, whilst the PFS is essentially IMO a scoping study with a base case option requiring further analysis etc etc etc as per a subsequent DFS outcome).
4. From 3.30 minute mark, it appears to me the plan of AVL is to target the steel market first and then move to encompass additional supply for the battery market which I felt is how the project will be progressed in any event. Refer Post #:
34070283 for that view. The growth markets are China predominantly in the next 10 years so that is what AVL plans to target - ties in with what they are thinking in terms of moving from a PFS to a DFS at point 3 above as well IMO IMO IMO
5. Tieing into point 4 above, saying from 4.55 that those getting into the market now will continue to benefit from higher prices (derived from supplying the steel market) but as more vanadium supply comes onstream the price will settle down (meaning any project scoped must be able to remain profitable during price stabilisations taking place say in 2022 - 2025 and beyond). But obviously those getting in now, which IMO I am interpreting as pre 2022IMO IMO IMO, IMO will have very good NPV and payback periods, hence the need for AVL to enter the market ASAP IMO. When battery prices come down AVL essentially then saying that is a very good thing in any event because will then provide for a new wave of vanadium demand (particularly in the battery market - his comment at the 5.20 minute mark and refer point 4 above). What is not stated in the presentation IMO is whether they expect the price of vanadium for battery grade input to differ to the steel market needs - refer to my embedded post in point 4 above to understand this comment by me.
6. Whilst they view VSUN as important, and will continue working in that space, their primary focus is getting a foothold in the China market through the mine development, an obvious point.
7. The comment at the 6.20 minute mark around partnering up with vanadium flow battery companies is interesting, and is to be done by VSUN. Obviously at the AVL level targetting Offtake Agreements with battery producers as well is my inference around the subsequent comment at 6.30 minute mark from there - refer point 4 above
Anyway, for avoidance of doubt this post is my interpretation of what has been said in the video. Readers might want to listen to the video- it is only 7 minutes - and make up their own minds whether I have interpreted it correctly or not.
All IMO IMO IMO IMO IMO and need a VB top up now
(20min delay)