@ProCapitalism that's a pretty harsh & glass-half-empty take on things...
While I fully appreciate that you (and so many of us shareholders) have been upset, frustrated and licking some pretty nasty financial wounds from the past 12-24 months events, I think your post is an overly pessimistic take on what is actually fantastic news and a very positive development for the company.
This project would have been ascribed zero value by the market in NMT's share price
To have the project backed directly by the likes of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EU) & Finnish Government, is a massive vote of confidence & part of Western Nations push back to protect critical metals interests & independence from China. It is not some speculative flash in the pan - these are serious A-Grade government partners. You complain about giving equity away - but how could we possibly fund the project ourselves? I'd love to hear how you think this could be done?! (other than raising capital at very dilutive levels). They have inked an agreement that will monetise the project, and by my calculations leave us with a majority equity stake initially, only reducing to a minority (but still material) equity stake should the EU Investors exercise their option to purchase further equity (which frankly would be a further vote of confidence & still values the project vehicle at over A$80M pre debt finance), plus securing a valuable potential future royalty stream. Would you rather we just continued holding 88% of a project that we cannot monetise & has no value until & unless we could secure a partner with deep pockets & the risk appetitie to match? Just not sure what you would have had the company do better on THIS front ...?
Understandably a lot of investor faith has been lost, and your & other’s trust will takea long time to be earned back. However with respect I suspect you are stuck viewing the company through alens of anger & feeling aggrieved – from the past couple of years. You can keep going back to your perception that Mt Marion was "given away" (with the benefit of perfect hindsight), that overly generous dividends were paid (again with the benefit of hindsight & subsequent events), and that a number of errors were made by the company's management (including not raising sufficient capital when they could of at much more reasonable market cap levels). Alternatively you can accept we are where we are, the "battery metals winter" has happened, and start looking forwards to where & how we might drive value from our IP, partnerships & projects.
I personally think this is a fantastic development – which has already ascribed a very material value to the RISAB project vehicle (which we own 88% of) of cA$83M. If it’s successful in securing the debt financing & finish government backing, it already has the port access, lease permits, firm offtake agreements with Glencore, & could ramp up in fairly steady order. Having been de-risked, our remaining equity stake would then be worth considerably more – which we could hold onto or monetise to reinvest in our core Primobious business, should it make sense to do so. The future royalty stream should not be anything to sneeze at, especially for patient capital.
I just can’t help but feel you’re being blinded by your past misgivings, and missing out on the much brighter picture here from today’s announcement. I share your frustration at what has occurred in recent years, but would encourage you to park that & try look forwards to where we go from here.
I’m delighted with today’s announcement – I think Chris & Co. have done a good job to get this up and running, from a position of relative weakness with an equity constrained balance sheet position & a Vanadium bear market backdrop.
Regards
Randy
