Share
2,848 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 994
clock Created with Sketch.
20/06/17
09:28
Share
Originally posted by yanlin
↑
Mac Bank still don't like GXY for some reason.
This report is full of holes and misinformation.
E.g. comments such as this: "....Whilst progress is being made, the ramp up of new supply at Mt Marion and Mt Cattlin has been slower than anticipated. It appears that technical difficulties at the mines and potentially in integrating new concentrate feed into existing conversion capacity are abundant....."
I thought we had already ramped up to nameplate production. Does MacBank know something that GXY management does not know???
Or, how about this: ".... Earnings for GXY in FY17 and FY18 are unchanged due to the contracted nature of sales...."
When did GXY lock in 2018 pricing??? Why weren't we told.... (if this was the case)??
But my favourite bit of selective editing is the pricing used in the models for GXY and PLS. Here are the forward price assumptions for spod pricing MacBank uses in its valuations:
ASSUMPTIONS FY17e FY18e FY19e FY20e
GXY Spod US$/t 904 648 646 689
PLS Spod US$/t 868 812 757 720
Variance (4.1%) +20.2% +14.7% +4.3%
These revenue assumptions are simply CRAP. I have never seen a more one-sided and biased analysis ever.
These guys should have to justify this to ASIC in order to keep their professional accreditation!!!
Expand
Lol agreed
And they actually assumed PLS be getting a price for FY18 when they haven't even built a plant and gone through with all the delays
PLS will most likely produce in FY19 by the way they are progressing