@blastfurnace
Would you concede that at least a portion of PLS holders believe that the PLS mine will produce millions of tons of spodumene per year, when its clear that the proposed mine is clearly somewhere in the 300-350kt range? Even the guy running your email list regularly quotes "millions". Are PLS forum members being misinformed about what they have invested in?
Where is the information on your forum to clear this up?
I note that you have done so tonight on the PLS forum.
But why do so many have this false idea - that the mine is so many times larger?
You're a smart guy who knows about mines. Don't you feel it necessary to point out that the scale of PLS's mine is much smaller than they are discussing?
Would you also concede that PLS has very little information about brine - to the point of enquiring where the brine goes to be turned into battery grade? This is nonsensical. You would know that a brine plant is a refinery. Tesla plans to source its own supply from exclusively brine-based projects (Silver Peak etc).
I understand that you have a ceramic grade deposit there.
The world loves pots - but ceramics is surely not going through the same kind of boom period.
Where do we invest to ride the Great Vase Boom of 2017?
Only kidding....
Galaxy has given a production cost of $260/t for Mt Cattlin. Presumably this is all in costs - and borne out from experience and real-world bills. PLS has quote $200/t.
Not sure what that factors in - transport etc. Lets assume that is correct.
Over time we are still looking at the relative value of 2 shares and what their near-term plans are to exploit their assets. One has 3 assets. One has one.
Galaxy's 2 spodumene assets will combine to produce more spodumene than PLS - 500kt vs 350kt.
And SDV, even at base rate, will nearly match them both, and again produce much more profit and more resulting carbonate than the PLS mine.
SDV has over 40 years of supply and will become the main focus for Galaxy. Its first base rate will be at 25kt. (with approx $2-$3k costs per ton - wait for DFS for something more definite)
25kt of carbonate is what a 400kt spodumene plant will eventually create ( without getting the benefit of the profit margin for the finished product - which is taken by approx 3k/t costs for the converter and their own transport and profit margins.
Hydroxide is produced by FMC from their brine deposit not far from SDV.
SDV is by all measure a world-class deposit. Joe Lowry is no fan of Orocobre but has praised the SDV asset extensively. You would know this.
Without a DFS it seems that the PLS forum has simply run its own projections of preferably-sized operations without considering that these much larger mines will have much bigger build costs and take longer to construct. I also note that only $100m of the $187m construction bill has been raised so far. Surely any larger will require more credit to be raised?
Its safe to assume that a smaller plant would be the wisest to begin with - and then see about increasing capacity once money starts rolling in. Would you agree? Or do you see a much larger mine being established straight away? At what cost?
It does seem ironic that we can discuss OPEX or real figures at all until a PLS DFS - but it was your forum that started running the comparisons so its only fair to call out some of the obvious falsehoods that have been gaining traction over there.
Thanks for visiting us. And you'd be welcome here too.
