Hi @mallis, no need to apologise, I completely understand feeling negative. Most of us are in the red now. I'm still confident we'll move ahead with a coherent company vision for Mt T soon, but for now we're all wondering what on earth is going on.
I know I'm now sounding like a very broken record, but I don't see why it would be in anyone's interest to sit on hands. It just seems so utterly unlikely that Barra or Conico directors would be doing anything other than working as hard and fast as possible to make themselves rich. So what has held things up? Who knows - perhaps negotiations with GAL which didn't work out?
Regarding off-takes: An agreement too early would involve giving away too much equity for too little money. Indications are that MT T's yields will significantly improve, so bargaining power will be much greater once PFS is complete.
Doing a deal with Creasy: below is my previously posted logic on why no deal with GAL (yet) is probably a very good thing for the JV. Very happy to have this logic shown to be flawed. Confirmation Bias suggests it probably is.
1: Economies of scale suggest that Mt thirsty's opex and capex per tonne, for both GAL and the JV would be lower if all parties combined efforts - they build a larger mine for not much more (adding 50% size to current $212 Mil plan obviously doesn't add $106 Mil), increase through-put, lower costs all round.
Thus, either:
A: All parties (GAL and JV) ARE working together and not strategic to say.
Or
B: Both parties believe that their respective portions are viable at their smaller scales and are unwilling to accept a merger because it's disadvantageous. I.e one or both have tentative off-take offers, or a smaller scale operation has attractive agility advantages in the market.
If A is true, then excellent. If B is true, then excellent if they are indeed viable alone. And if the PFSs prove they are not, logic suggests they would combine.
BAR Price at posting:
3.3¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
