Share
5,709 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 470
clock Created with Sketch.
15/02/24
13:26
Share
Originally posted by Cosmoterios:
↑
Once again. I will repeat. MNS directors or nominees have to be on the board of IM3NY, to influence that decision: to replace C4V technology with something else. And the only way they can get back on board IM3NY, is to buy out (refinance) the USD $100M. These lenders simply want their money back - plus interest if they can get it. So how is MNS going to find AUD $150M (100/0.65)??? Plus $$$$$$ to re-engineer the plant to produce "generic:' Li batteries??? Is MNS going to raise capital at 1 cents each to raise AUS $150M??? If that is the case, then every shareholder would be diluted to oblivion. Is MNS going to borrow AUD $150M? What security does it offer to borrow AUD $150M??? Its the plant in NYK - that it has been written off, and $500k cash in the bank!!! On the best case scenario, you can argue they can offer the plant as security - which is NOT operating to specifications, and will require many millions to re-engineer it to make it operational. Is that enough Security for the Banks/Institutions??? No way. Then, who will they supply batteries to, when they don't have any OFFTAKE deals anymore??
Expand
And the final nail for that coffin is the commercial viability of battery. Currently the giant plant (CATL, BYD,..) making cells at $60-80/kW. If MNS can't do that with the plant (im3NY was estimated to make $150/kW cell in interview with FP), forget about the rest. Get out while you can.