Heeman, you raise a very interesting point with regards to MNS....

Heeman, you raise a very interesting point with regards to MNS. Before I expand, let me say that I'm cautiously excited for MNS for their off-take, and am very interested in the upcoming scoping study, and I'm not intending to talk them down, as on the basis of what I've seen they would be my next in line for a small investment in the graphite space (KNL retains my big investment), and I've posted on MNS thread to indicate my cautious optimism with their recent announcement. I'm merely highlighting something for KNL investors.

With regards to flake distribution, MNS and KNL are two of the standouts as far as global resources go (so far. I'm excluding Merelani from this, which will be a game changer with it's flake distribution and purity in particular to better MNS, but that still might not happen, so we'll leave it aside). Between the two on published info so far, MNS has a better flake distribution (i.e. a tonne of MNS graphite is likely to sell for more than a tonne of KNL graphite, assuming similar purity). However, as you mention, KNL has a very good grade. What does this mean?

Well, to get a tonne of graphite, MNS has to physically dig up and move and process nearly 20 tonnes of ground. To get a tonne of graphite, KNL needs to move and process a little over 10 tonnes. To put it another way, when MNS dig up a tonne of ground, they have 52 kgs to compare to KNL's 98 kgs. (i.e 5.2% grade v 9.8% grade averages).

Further, KNL's is a higher purity. And here is where it gets interesting. Distribution and purity affects sales price. Grade and purity affects costs. MNS gets a notionally better basket price for it's finished concentrate (assuming same purity, which is actually worse for MNS), but has to move and process twice as much ground to do so. If all other things were equal (in terms of distribution and purity), MNS needs a significantly better basket price just to break even with KNL in terms of margin per tonne of ground dug (not margin per tonne of concentrate). So the question becomes, what is the tipping point between flake distribution and purity and grade, where flake distribution compensates for poorer grade and purity? (I'm not looking for answers to this query at this stage, because MNS has no published feasibility numbers to draw a firm conclusion from yet)

When you convert some numbers back to a physical "per ore tonne" basis, rather than a "per concentrate tonne" basis, and when you allow for either a:
a. reduction in sale price based on lower (MNS) purity, OR
b. increase in costs, to process to a higher purity
then you find that the actual MNS margin is actually a lot less than you initially think (albeit still very profitable), and more importantly for investors, it appears less for MNS than for KNL, on a "tonne of ground" moved basis (if you allow realistic flake prices, rather than optimistic ones). I'm going to be incredibly interested in the scoping studies/feasibilities for MNS, and will post a more detailed comparison in due course once MNS provide some more numbers. So far, I've used the numbers from the last MNS corporate presentation with regards to my sale prices, although MNS haven't published anything substantial with regards to their costs yet.

(again, I'll state, this isn't a pissing contest type of post. I like Tanz graphite, and MNS appears to have a good deposit, and may be very worthwhile to back. Genuine responses or points of view are welcome, especially from any qualified geos. Superficial myopic views or "you are just a hater" type comments are not welcome, because that's not what my post is intended for).

Regardless, I agree with you comment re bagging. There aren't a lot of graphite companies that are priced for multi bag returns. KNL is a standout as far as that goes, and that will start becoming clearer over 2015.