Thanks for the reply arf, I love a healthy discussion. We are going to have to disagree on this and hope to keep it healthy.
Just to be clear, I have never accused SYA of misappropriating funds.
I also never suggested SYA had run out of cash. I have agreed with others who have pointed out that if they did have enough money (as you say that they do and I agree), why not wait till a more opportune time? We’re not talking months to wait, most are expecting some sort of reaction when the off take is announced that SYA could exploit in the very near term.
I have compared financial transactions against peers. The comparison I made with WR1 and PMT was the purchase costs and whether the high acquisition price for Moblan is commensurate. It has been expressed previously by others that paying such a huge sum was (I’m struggling for the accurate word, but will go with ok) because SYA received the benefit of having the Quebec government as partner, and that would provide an easier path to production. Other (respected posters even) have questioned this in the past. I am now pointing out that WR1 and PMT didn’t pay such large acquisition costs and will still likely receive assistance (not necessarily financial). In fact, that is the express purpose of Canada’s Nov 2022 Critical Minerals Strategy. It will build power, roads and rail to the remote mining locations and assist with permitting.
Regarding the future capital raises for other companies, yes I agree there will be. There will also be for Sayona. Is Sayona going to wait for profit from the Carbonate Plant to pursue Moblan in 2026? If not, then there will be subsequent capital raises. Moblan is at a similar stage as PMT and WR1 in that they are proving up nice deposits and planning to develop. Yes I agree they will have different costs, particularly PMT with the lakes. Moblan will benefit from already having the road on its doorstep.
I just cannot forget the SP being $0.36 (yes likely overpriced at the time), Paul selling at the top (he may have had personal reasons, pub test for this one), followed by a PFS announcement that saw the SP drop and then do a capital raise at $0.18. That was 12 months ago, May 22, and here we are 12 months later and raising at the same price despite the accolade of re-starting NAL for $200 million. I abided the May 22 CR (not that they care) as it would have been bad to raise and then drop an underwhelming PFS. So I waited to see subsequent better CR. Note - most of us agreed at the time that that PFS undersold NAL.
Other companies do capitalise on a higher SP and raise at the peak. LRS did it in 2022 at 16c when the SP had been mostly below $0.10, also WR1 earlier this year at $4.18 and also $2. This has resulted in better returns to shareholders via less dilution.
I wouldn't be here if I couldn't see the potential. I have stood up for SYA in the past. But I do also like to hear from the people who raise valid counter points, as it makes the investment thesis more solid if you can counter it and assists in avoiding confirmation bias. I believe that compared to peers, SYA has not timed their CR as well and have provided examples of such. I would like to see the CR undertaken more opportunistically for us shareholders and have highlighted it.
Other's have asked in the past for counter points that they can debate - which I had a huge amount of respect for.
People rarely get likes for posts that are not glowing in the praise of their holdings and I don't expect many for my posts.
(20min delay)