CTM would be somewhere in the first half on the production cost...

CTM would be somewhere in the first half on the production cost curve and now has a ~20 year mine life, so from that perspective it ticks all the boxes, but the main problem is depressed long term Ni price outlook and the unfavourable EV trends with the LFP battery chemistry being the preferred choice of most mass produced EVs currently.

When we have a look at the attached prez, it's obvious the company used a (slightly) optimistic Ni price guidance, which doesn't seem to be in sync with the recent NI prices.

NPV is US$735 million using a 19,800 usd / tonne nickel price.

Current nickel price is below 15.000 usd/t, which is way below the sensitivity analysis threshold used in the feasibility study (+- 10%). Just for reference, on $17,820 nickel price, the FS forecasted an 532m USD NPV (I adjusted 474.9m NPV from the FS to the current exchange rate) and I assume on current nickel prices (15,000$), the NPV would be barely above (if) the pre production capex of US$380 million needed to build the project. In my eyes, it is a major red flag when it comes to financing a mining project as the NPV to Capex ratio should be at least 2:1.

My take is don't expect anything to change until the Ni price is stabilising around 20k and only then the company can start applying for debt financing (and of course CRs) and use the hedges required for the first few years of production. Till then, either Indonesia has to restrict (or exhaust) its massive Ni output or the battery chemistries need to shift towards the nickel-based chemistries (NCM) again. Some of the largest OEMs started to test their solid-state batteries, pushing their range towards and beyond 1000 km. These companies claimed (Toyota, Honda, BYD) they plan to start producing/sourcing these batteries by 2027.