Would appreciate some technical help. I'm trying to work out some way to compare today's announced figures from Springdale with some other graphite projects, particularly Renascor's Siviour project but am struggling.
This table from today's announcement seems to suggest the current contained graphite at Springdale is 3.2 million tonnes
The top right table in this snippet from a preso by Renascor in November last year I think indicates the contained graphite at the Siviour project is 6.9 Mt but the chart in the left hand side indicates that the contained graphite at Siviour is only around 1.4 Mt which surely cannot be right if Springdale has 3.2 Mt: the IG6 announcement today is explicit that by current figures Springdale is the second biggest body presumably after Siviour. I am interested in how Springdale rates not only against Siviour but against other large graphite bodies around the world. (I understand that Renascor was comparing deposits by reserves not resources so maybe that chart is of no use to me seeing today's announcement only reports resources).
(sorry, the names of the other graphite deposits are so blurry)
A second comparison between what International Graphite is proposing and what Renascor continues to spin its wheels about: the road distance between Springdale and the proposed processing centre at Collie is said to be 450 km while the road distance between Renascor's Siviour mine at Arno Bay and its proposed processing centre at Bolivar near Adelaide is apparently 513 km. Bolivar is 20 km to the Port of Adelaide and Collie is 59 km from the Port of Bunbury. Best guess for me is that distance does not disadvantage IG's proposed set-up over what Renascor is proposing.
A third useful metric to compare the two projects might be time to production. On the face of it if Renascor FIDs Siviour by the end of the year then that project would have at least 12 months jump on IG but I keep getting the feeling that Renascor's David Christensen is stalling for time. My guess is that the Chinese crashing the graphite price is spooking the non-Chinese players so he is struggling with binding off-take agreements and debt raising. If Siviour has been put in low gear waiting for the price cycle to spin then perhaps IG can catch up with Siviour's development progress (famous last words: Renascor will likely make a door buster announcement tomorrow).
Another way I think that is apt to compare the two projects is technical expertise. At least from what Andrew Worland keeps telling us Phil Hearse and David Pass are technical guns in down-stream graphite processing and are exactly the blokes you need around to nail the development and commissioning of what are fairly difficult processes. I don't know who Renascor have on board with the right set of technical skills to navigate them through setting up downstream processing but my guess is they don't have Messrs Hearse and Pass.
A final comparison: I've followed Renscor for a while now and I think its boss, David Christensen, does a terrible job of selling the Renascor vision. For sure MD's are expected to do many things other than engage with the markets and investors and for sure Renascor has been stuck in the valley of death - the big down dip in the Lassonde Curve - for well over a year now but DC pulling a Howard Hughes should simply not be on for a publicly listed company. Just because Renascor has more than enough cash does not justify DC ignoring shareholders. In contrast I have found Andrew Worland to be a willing and able conduit between the company and its shareholders. Does AW's recent spurt of presentations suggest a cap raising is not far away? Maybe, even though they say they are okay for the time being. But at least we know that IG is active in a number of areas and that tangible things are happening at the company. With Renascor at best we can do is assume that progress is being made.
