Simple layman's comparison..
|
Column 1 |
Column 2 |
Column 3 |
| 1 |
|
Mt Cattlin (100% Galaxy) |
Olaroz (66.5% Orocobre Ownership) |
| 2 |
Tonnes produced[/B] |
52,139.00 |
2,618.11 |
| 3 |
Tonnes sold |
58,094.00 |
2,300.90 |
| 4 |
Costs ($US/tonne) |
$325.00 |
$2,624.09 |
| 5 |
Price received ($US/tonne) |
$868.00 |
$7,680.75 |
| 6 |
Sales cash earnings ($US mill) |
$50,425,592.00 |
$26,575,395.00 |
| 7 |
Profit (US$ Tonnes sold - Cost) |
$31,545,042.00 |
$17,496,043.60 |
Galaxy's sales earnings from Mt Cattlin are US$23.85 million dollars MORE than that of Orocobre's ownership in Olaroz. (Or AUD$29.945 million)
For Orocobre to match the sales revenue that Galaxy are receiving from Mt Cattlin, Orocobre would need a 90% increase in sales revenue.
As a hypothetically over the next year...
|
Column 1 |
Column 2 |
Column 3 |
| 1 |
|
Mt Cattlin (100% Galaxy) |
Olaroz (66.5% Orocobre Ownership) |
| 2 |
Sales cash earnings ($US mill)[/B] |
$201,702,368.00 |
$106,301,580.00 |
| 3 |
Profit (US$ Tonnes sold - Cost) |
$126,180,168.00 |
$69,984,174.40 |
The above does not include any sales from lithium chemicals after tolling by Galaxy.
Remembering that the above figures are in South Pacific Peso's (AUD) so have a bit of fun doing the conversion..
Hypothetically Galaxy's sales cash earnings in AUD - $250 million.
Hypothetical profit in AUD - $158 million.
Those losses Galaxy carry to offset any tax obligation will be a significant advantage also.
Well noted
@Zetland1 - Galaxy's ownership in Lepidico approx $27 million. (not sure if your figure includes the 5 million options?)
Also some key points spotted in the announcement...
- Successful test work completed producing battery grade lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide
- Planning commenced for test evaporation pond and continuous pilot plant to be operational in 2018
Also noting
@maxi1981 cause for excitement...
View attachment 924704
Though of particular interest is the last line wording... Should that be 'not' or 'now'?
