So are other people reading this announcement as saying at the peak (ie the 2nd shipment, or possibly Q3), they were paying about $1.67/dmtu in shipping. This has reduced by 45% or $0.75/dmtu and is now about $0.92/dmtu?
The shipping cost is now in the low $30's per ton. If the grade was 33.7% and the price was $31/t, then $31/33.7=$0.92/dmtu matching the above calculations.
So we start with the 44% CIF price of around US$5.58. There is then a possibly formulaic adjustment back to "slightly below" normal 37% pricing. This is probably at least $0.50 and may be higher. Shipping costs are then deducted, and you are in the low $4's (or worst case, high $3's). The upfront cash payment will be short around US$0.65, but that is expected to come back as smelter credits. As an all-up including smelter credits price, that's looking a touch below the DFS. For the next quarterly, it could still be in the mid $3's/dmtu because the smelter credits wouldn't have been paid.
On a DFS cost base of $2.91/dmtu its now making ok money of >$1/dmtu. On an accounting basis it may well be making money in Q2 because the smelter credits would be recognized as revenue and the costs of unshipped ore would be recognized as inventory not a cost. For the Q2 cash return, the lack of smelter credits will lower the cash in, as will shipping less than a quarters production (if the production run-rate is approaching or above 20kt/mth). The lack of efficiency from not yet being at nameplate will keep costs/ton higher so a small cash loss looks likely for Q2.
The key being
It is still a start-upThe screen shot below is from metalbulletin dot com if the link doesn't work.
https://**promotion blocked**/Article/4014556/Seaborne-manganese-ore-strength-continues-despite-falling-alloy-prices-in-China.html
(20min delay)