Hi Thesi. By your figures and calcs: to compare Q3 ORE sales...

Hi Thesi.

By your figures and calcs: to compare Q3 ORE sales revenue share with Galaxy's Q3, wouldn't you need to take into account US/AUD exchange rate of $0.78

15.4/0.78 = AUD$19.7 mil in sales revenues for ORE.

The GXY figure you say is AUD$21.6 mil EBITDA.

Come to think of it EBITDA is earnings and not comparable to sales revenue so without checking the quarterlies of both companies, I'm confused!




[QaUOTE="Thesi, post: 30089696, member: 159945"]You make a good point @p_barnes101

"For GXY to hit 7.27 in 3 months GXY would be worth about twice what ORE is worth today."

If I can rephrase that into my perception.

Galaxy would need to be producing twice the amount of revenue.

In my mind it makes sense and is only fair that a company producing twice the amount of revenue should be worth more.

Referring to Orocobre's last quarterly report issued 27th October it states of Olaroz.

Sales revenue for the September quarter is US$23.2 million on total sales of 2,072 tonnes of lithium carbonate

Orocobre also point out.

All figures 100% Olaroz Project basis

Orocobre's ownership in the project is 66.5%.

Which means of that result they would be entitled to $15.4 million.

16th of October Galaxy Resources Quarterly announcement for the same period.

Q3 EBITDA of A$21.6M from the Mt Cattlin operations before CAPEX

Of which Galaxy is entitled to 100%.

The difference between the revenue of Orocobre and Galaxy for that quarter is approximately 30% or around $6.2 million.

On the 29th November Galaxy Resources announced a 5 year offtake.

• Binding offtake agreements for minimum 200,000 tonnes per annum of lithium concentrate signed with multiple customers for 5 years

• Headline pricing achieved for 2018 higher than 2017

• A portion of Mt Cattlin lithium concentrate to be converted on Galaxy’s behalf into lithium carbonate and or lithium hydroxide

• Galaxy to commence selling lithium chemical products to the end-user market in 2018

Some of us have supposed the price per tonne is around US$1000

And the calculation of $1000 x 200,000 is..

US$200 million.

View attachment 907928

That figure does not include tolling.. And depending on the level they do it might increase that revenue substantially, nor does it include further increases in production.. This is quite simply where we are at now.

US$200 million broken into the four quarters is US$50 million..

So if Orocobre continue to perform at $15.4 million per quarter then Galaxy will not only double them.

Galaxy actually exceeds Orocobre on a conservative calculation by more than 3 times.

So if we were to go back and say that if Galaxy is producing twice the amount of revenue to Orocobre.

Then what does it mean if we are generating 3.24 times more revenue than that of Orocobre?

View attachment 907934

Orocobre's market cap right now is $1,534 million.

Times two it's at least $3 billion..

And times 3.24..

It would place Galaxy’s Market Cap at just under $5 billion.

Coming off where we are now at $1.7 billion.

I'm not going to say that the above suppositions are absolutely perfect..

Nor will I say that Orocobre might be over priced for the revenue it is currently generating.

But what above does point out is how misunderstood and undervalued Galaxy Resources is by comparison.

View attachment 907940

Apples to apples...

One might have a red skin and the other a green skin, but at the end of the day they are both apples and what it comes down to is..

Revenue.

View attachment 907946

The End... [/QUOTE]