back of the envelope calculations

This post is intended to follow on from the one posted by twincreeks re: nmp tech 7/12/2010 21:16 which I found very interesting.
I am no investment analyst but can crunch basic numbers on a calculator with the best of them! So here we have a situation where MHM will earn $8.6m pa EBITDA from the Australian Alreco operations which I will call $6m (more or less) in NPAT terms in the interests of simplicity. From what Im hearing, the first American plant (SSC JV) is planned to be 8-10 times the size of the Australian operation so lets assume the same profit margin on the throughput ($300 per tonne) and assume its only 8 times the size. Oh yeah, and the $6m NPAT from the Australian operations is only 60% of the actual profits under the profit sharing agreement made with the founders private company, but for international operations MHM will retain the full amount so without this it would be $10m. So in this scenario, the American operations would yield a profit of 8 x $10m = $80m NPAT then add the NPAT of the Australian operations of $6m to give you a total NPAT of $86m. Now, the fully diluted market capitalisation of MHM is $127m using todays closing price of $1.00 and assuming all options are converted to fully paid shares. A company earning this level of profits would be priced (IMHO) at a minimum of 10 times P/E ratio and if the growth profile turns into what I think it will, potentially as high as 15-20 times again, lets not too carried away and just call it 10 times this would give you a market cap. of 10 x $86m = $860m which implies a return of $860m / $127m current market cap. = almost 7 times your money from current share price!
However, if I diverge a little and dare to make some assumptions following on from twincreeks post as referred to above, the numbers get a whole lot more interesting (Is that possible? I hear you say). The NMP (Non-Metallic Product) recycling technology has the potential to double the profit margin on throughput (I am assuming that the terms of sale of the technology would be quite similar, ie no upfront payment and a 5% royalty stream this is the same as the current Alreco used technology if you exclude the profit sharing arrangement for the Australian operations but obviously I cant vouch for the accuracy of this assumption although it appears logical particularly in view of the founders circa 20% holding), but lets assume theres some leakage of margin and only half the margin feeds through to the bottom line. Remember, managements approach is to create win-win situations and get the plants up and running on a large scale (whereas I am talking about the first plant only in this exercise). This would imply a return of 10 times your money and Im only talking about the first plant in the US and believe that some of the other assumptions are conservative (although admittedly I have not allowed for any potential capital raising for US expansion plans). Not to mention the fact that this excludes any upside from expansion of the Australian operations (or the buyback of the profit sharing agreement), the SPL (Spent Pot Lining) technology which from the interest expressed by local councils in America could be huge, the whole Silica division and the other minerals projects.
Id love to know what other posters think of my opinions, numbers as above Im not asking that you all agree please feel free to disagree, correct, critique, etc. But please, Im really not interested in the inflammatory ramblings of investors who claim (I dont believe a word of it personally) to have short-sold at optimal prices so please dont respond. You know who you are. No?
Also, I only have intermittent access to my PC so please excuse any delay in responding. Good luck to all holders!
Disclosure: I am an MHM shareholder (in substantial numbers for me) and would love nothing better than to buy more shares on the cheap, so please traders, go on, sell em down! IF YOURE NOT LONG, YOURE WRONG!!