How can a company request a “trading halt”, publish an announcement and see its capitalization decrease?
The TIVAN process was developed by SMS in Austria and METS (Perth) to manufacture V2O5.
A pilot plant in Austria produced samples approved by Mitsubishi (VRFB) and WOOJIN (FeV, offtake agreement).
As the TIVAN process requires high CAPEX (> $1bn), compensated by a low OPEX, TNG decided to use the residue from this process to manufacture TiO2 pigment.
TNG hired a seasoned TiO2 expert (P. Guillemaille) to implement TiO2 operations:
-Offtake agreement with DKSH (100% production, take-or-pay)
-Partnership with Ti-Cons (Germany) to develop a process.
The TIVAN’s residue contained 75% TiO2 (very good point) but less than 3% Fe:
-Too expensive to valorize residues with the TiO2 chloride process
-Not enough Fe to start the sulphation with the sulphate process
TNG decided to develop a new sulphate process for the TIVAN tailing with the help of CSRIO.
In July 2022, the new sulphate process was almost finalized (Ti-Cons/CSRIO) but at that point the investors lost patience (did they really understand the TNG project?) and implemented a change of management.
Paul Burton was sent off.
P. Guillemaille was dismissed on 24 December 2022 without compensation.
Simon Morten left the TIVAN Board as TIVAN no longer has interest in TiO2.
No more collaboration with Ti-Cons.
What is TIVAN+ process?
Nobody knows.
CSRIO has never worked on the TIVAN process but only on new TiO2 sulphate process and has received samples from Austria (SMS).
What about TiO2?
TiO2 pigment is required to mitigate the CAPEX/OPEX regarding V2O5 operations.
It seems that the TIVAN company chose not the TiO2 pigment (USD3,000 /mt) but a TiO2 feedstock (USD300 /mt): not enough revenue to compensate for the CAPEX/OPEX.
What about SMS Group?
SMS no longer has contact with TIVAN, which means no more interests and investments from KfW IPEX-BANK.
I doubt that TIVAN has the SMS know-how and therefore the need to develop and carry out a so-called TIVAN+ process with CSRIO.
Conclusion:
V2O5 production represents high potential in terms of profitability but TIVAN and investors should keep in mind the following facts:
-There is three routes producing V2O5 as (i) V slag from the steel industry (70%), (ii) primary mine operations (18%) and (iii) secondary recovery from recycling (12%)
-There are only four companies using the primary mine operations that are performing poorly financially (e.g. Largo, Bushveld): they need a very profitable by-product.
-Historically the price of V2O5 is USD7-10 /lb V2O5. We expect demand for V2O5 (VRFB) to increase but the price will not increase given the flexibility of the production using V slag from the steel industry to meet the demand.
-The steel industry represents 91% of V2O5 uses.
-The development of TIVAN will require a lot of investment and if successful, the V2O5 industry only sees TIVAN entering production in 2027-28.
Like my colleagues from the industry (I am not an investor) we wonder where TIVAN is going. Too much politics, too much discussion and no progress in production.
Finally, I miss the days of TNG when we had real figures with $ and tonnage...
(20min delay)