Aren't the first 3 examples you point to all the same thing essentially? I agree the increase in strip ratio is of note because it leads to increased costs. However isn't the whole purpose of a DFS to prove that a mine/project is 'feasible' or 'profitable'?
They've evidently incorporated the increased strip ratio/costs into the calculations and have come out with an increase in profitability overall.
Something to note with PLL OT price and market price, and I would like you to reply with the way you would break this down if you disagree with my numbers/breakdown of this - lets say PLL buy the SC5.4-5.8 for $US700/t, instead of $US900/t, then SYA sells the other half of product at market for $US3000/t(sizeable discount from what PLS were selling their concentrate at market for). Average that out to get the price they will be receiving for product: $US3700/t / 2 = $US1850/t. Then x 0.75 for SYA's cut of the profit = $US1387/t
The DFS used $US1352/t and seen an increase in profitability per year. Now the current price of spod concentrate is debatable and I'm not going to sit here and say I know for sure that the price is going to rocket back up, but $US3000/t is a pretty conservative number and it is still profitable according to the DFS.
I understand your point in regard to pointing to big NPV headlines etc etc. But what I haven't seen anyone who is knocking the DFS do is dive into the "less exciting figures" and provide the calculations or numbers to prove that the headline is just a flashy diversion.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply to my desire for a balanced view point to be introduced because I am interested in hearing the other side to this.
Another aside point in regard to the DFS assuming 5.4-5.8% concentrate - are you savvy at all to what PLL is going to do in this situation given their offtake commitments are for SC6 and they have no other resource base? My assumption is they look elsewhere for product but admittedly its a unique situation and rather foreign to me.
(20min delay)