Share
9,100 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 17717
clock Created with Sketch.
18/02/20
11:16
Share
Originally posted by Kikker1959:
↑
Scarpa, I respect your knowledge of the technical side of mining, its vast. Where we differ is the execution and the risk profiles that come to the front and the discount given tot that. Having a DFS or other studies, does not automatically mean that these cost and timelines can be met. Again, historically AVZ never met one. The original rigs from SA were months and months delayed and the pond was dry a month after the max timeline set. Managerial skills, wet seasons, external parties, corrupt government officials, infrastructure rollout etc etc are come into play. No DFS can cover these risks, delays and perhaps cost blow outs. The markets will look closely at all this and thats why the WA miners are rated and priced always higher, it has little to do with the size and quality of the resource. I reiterate that having a 1b resource size is meaningless if you have a 5mt mine only. You can ramp this up only with a Hydrox plant but I cant see this this side of 2030-2035. Although LTR DFS might be a year behind AVZ, I still believe that LTR will be producing well before AVZ given the above. However the most likely outcome is that the mine will be operating but not in LTR hands. AIMO.
Expand
Good to have your view clearly articulated. Time will tell how competent AVZ is at executing the plan to its chosen production start date, but I suspect that will be closely tied to an Offtake Agreement or equity for Offtake Agreement. That will be the thing to watch for post DFS IMO as well. All IMO