As i'm not as well read with PM8 purported concentrate grade do...

As i'm not as well read with PM8 purported concentrate grade do you have this information and i'd be happy to make an estimate for it's estimated valuation based on it JORC elemental lathanide breakdown.

35% grade concentrate with 50% payability. (i'm still using the price of elements you last provided with the NdPr updated with recent rise)







So yes i agree that a higher concentrate improves the revenue substantially. Probably will be higher than the figures i've presented but that seems to be the case across all stocks. I'd really like to see how companies actually determine their revenue price (that not being facetious) but i suspect it's usually using forecasted pricing mechanism etc.

For the record the sheet was a hybrid construction whereby i was trying to get some level of consistenty across 12 different stocks. Very hard with different. elements, different grades, different concentrates, different TPA, etc etc etc can call it bogus but i landed within 5% for IXR's revenue for product before it was released, before recoveries were known etc

Post #:44523916 is the long post explaining it's initial inception. it intended to work out if i could get some sort of linearly baseline for concentrate revenue because there seemed like a lot of difference. So i normalised all the basket pricing, normalised concentrate grade and gave me an absolute ball park figure to what 1% concentrate grade is worth at normalised basket. With that i could actually try to predict a concentrate grade revenue price with only need to know grade and basket price. The blue and orange table is the other way of doing it when you know you're elemental recover and PPM and is IMO far more accurate and how the calc's should be done.

Also, regarding my bogus sheet. i am well aware some of the figures used are from the PFS which is the latest information of PM8 available and i do state this in Post #:48111467 when questioned by a poster here.

"2) PM8.
nail on the head, using the old PFS until the new BFS comes out. Firmly acknowledge the new concentrate grades but can't add them until i know what the new capex and operational costs are to yield this concentrate. It's my assumption that their operational costs will go up a lot, but their overall margin will improve due to increased revenue on concentrate grade. I also assume capex to increase. They will sacrifice IRR for a better NPV IMO."

If there's something you disagree with in that statement let me know.

re the hard rock comments: There are primary and secondary deposits. It's my understanding that longonjo is carbonatite-alkaline intrusion as far as i'm aware. Which would make it a primary deposit. aka hard-rock. This is irrespective of the 25m of 'weathered' minerilisation

here are two good links for anyone keen on brushing up on minerology. Good reading.
http://www.ga.gov.au/webtemp/image_cache/GA19677.pdf
http://www.geologyin.com/2014/11/carbonatite-deposits.html#:~:text=Carbonatite is a unique type,minerals of the carbonate class.&text=Carbonatite deposits may form as,intrudes into host rock formations.




On that, regarding some comments here about the BFS changing to include increased mineralogy


It's being based on only the measured and indicated resources of the weathered zone which is 40mT.
If putting forward a 2mtpa feed rate this will support a 20Y mine life which is more than enough IMO.

PFS


Appears was based on 14.8mT, hence why i can see the delay to have the upgrade inputted to the BFS which is a plus too.

But it does make sense for them to focus on that weathered zone as it does contain the better grades. I imagine that the change in tact to higher concentration is to maximise value and ass previous stated sacrifice some IRR by spending a little more capex and in turn generate a better margin. Also noting that the process circuitry which is set-up for that higher grade ore will mean diminishing returns as they move towards the 1.48%. I garner they've targetted only the weathered as it may be the only economical part and that processing 1.48% may prove marginal (at current prices). Regardless, 20Y's mine life is more than enough and TBH if you get decent margins on that and that alone then that's still a great result.

Anyways, as i have stated often PM8 was my best pick outside of the stock i hold and had i invested here i would have made better return than where i did and that's life and i congratulate the holders here.

Also would appear that PM8 has strong governmental support along with strong financial interest and is one of the few hard rock companies i think will get up. Finally, on the spreadsheet, i apologies for offending anyone by amending the figures on PM8's PFS. I have found that when i calculated all concentrate revenues for all the stocks i can't replicate their revenue. PM8 was actually the closest in terms of what the PFS said and what i could calculate on spot price. i did indicate that it was my own workings and that people should refer to the company announcements of companies for most up to date information.

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/235261646.pdf good document here btw
regarding china and reserves and shutting down mines.


just goes to show how big bayan obo i and also what mines are actually producing rare earths.
regarding the environmental comments i agree that practices in china havent been great. Worth noting China banned this surface leaching practices. It's worth noting that this leaching practice, isn't new stuff. typical in copper, gold, nickel etc etc. Any ways i understand people don't want to hear about other stocks, but if anyone is genuinely interested worth noting that environmental hurdles will all have to be applied and that the CEO is former lead of CleanTeq (CLQ) who literally specialised and wrote the book on water treament and is utilising on their cobalt nickel project. the SS soon will delineate that. Post #:47868809

https://www.cleanteq.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/NI43101-Clean-TeQ-Sunrise-Technical-Report.pdf

Anyways back to PM8 i await the BFS here and look forward to it's release. I'll be sure to update the figures in the table. I will then also try and replicate results and pressure test the BFS as i have with all companies. These are some posts on the REE threads which have decent information relating to REE and VML - this was as requested by @Paul7890 whom most would know as a well respected former holder here. depsite me not being that bullish on the project they were also well received. Post #:47749139, Post #:47762270 not so well received when i discussed their economics Post #:47798537

If we cease with the low brow snipes some of what i have to say may even be useful. I'm actually not posting of stocks i don't hold to undermine them. You'll find most posts have taken a fair bit of time and research to share. PM8 has done excellent for holders new and old and i hope the BFS belts it out the park. No animousity from me.

Should be evident that i have some level of background in the industry and rather than my posts be taken as a snipes of an evil investor, i much more from the angle of knowledge share, learning and respect. Hoping i have earnt some here. If not, no sweat.

For context here's posts of me supporting this stock despite not holding (these are on PM8 threads)
Post #:44270974 "awesome news, well done"
Post #:44283502 - fundamentally awesome stock.

I won't share posts from other threads, but if people search they will find equally appreciative comments of this stock.

SF2TH

​