Time for those of us who can’t spin things to look at the...

Time for those of us who can’t spin things to look at the basics.

Costs.

In AUZ’s opinion* it will cost them $6.10per pound to produce nickel.
In CLQ’s opinion* it will cost them $4.68 to produce the same.
In ARL’s opinion* it will cost them $4.63

*or whichever company they took on to do the assessment.

CLQ of course is interesting as they’re trying something new? But of course have some revenue from their water business & to whoever tried to make the joke ‘water is a commodity?’ Yes, it is. It is one of the most precious commodities on earth & is only becoming ever more so.
They have stated they will use a tailings dam.

AUZ is going the HPAL ( off the shelf? ), route which is great because that means there should be a depth of expertise available to be hired to both build and manage that. They have stated a tailings dam will be used.

ARL is going the PAL route which is great because a lower pressure system will of course be under less strain & at face value be cheaper as the pressure vessels, valves etc will all under less strain. They are also not going to require a tailings dam which reduces costs comparatively speaking. There is also acid neutraliser on site which cuts costs comparatively speaking- it even has recoverable nickel etc in it so will most likely be processed itself at a later stage to recover those metals.

For any who’d like to dispute any of those things please be clear as to why any of those assessments are incorrect so that any of the companies who performed them ( held to industry standards ), will be able to seek recompense of the assertion either being withdrawn or compensation regarding potential damage to the perception of their business which could negatively affect their business.

If we seek to undermine any participant in an industry which has standard requirements we might take time to remember that we’re in effect undermining the belief in the industry as a whole.


These are all different animals & should be judged on the most basic metric of all- cost to produce combined with timeframe as regards production.

Dearer sooner is pretty comparable to cheaper later so if AUZ can sneak through & produce first? Sweet.
If not? Not so sweet.

When we wish gltah here it kinda has a sting in the tail- the director’s aren’t holders in a meaningful way ( better off saying gltar ‘good luck to all retailers’ ), & to all those ‘they can’t buy because of news’ people?

Well they just stated that there was no news coming a couple weeks ago ( ASX query regarding the sudden SP rose ), so they could have bought then.

An injection by them at this stage could do a lot for the company- it might convince a lender for example that the BOD believe it’s a goer. Who knows what will it get something over the line? One thing’s for sure- not putting in money while other boards do is not a good look.

Cheers Hing for the heads up on what I was looking at.

Ura where did I say I was a teacher? I was using an analogy & so what even if I was a teacher? There is more than one subject to learn about in this world. Is it a BFS? Why wasn’t it listed as so & why has no news outlet announced it as so?

If it is- great. If it took you 10 mins to ‘create’ a jpg to show it? I’d wonder if you made that yourself.