Don't like been misquoted, what I said was if start at 2 mtpa the NPV is not that high as simply a spodumene producer so you need to produce at a higher rate to make the NPV work if just want to be a spodumene producer. Hence why I stated I prefer a 5mtpa start up facility moving to 10 mtpa. However, I said a lower spodumene production target will work IMO with tin/tantulum production, meaning you don't have to ramp up from 2mpta as quickly to 5 mtpa and then 10 mtpa. I refer you to post for these views: Post #:
33320699 and Post #:
33325571
Most exploration plays that fail, because only one in 50 ever make it to mining btw, is because they don't have a resource primarily. Well the principal hurdle is met here - they will have a significant indicated and measured resource to work with so it is around capex and opex costs and the DRC has a lot of producing mines btw. And here because they have so much resource, scale we determine whether the economies of scale make it a worthwhile project (think iron ore in the Pilbara - remote regions with no rail and port when first developed bak in the 1960s and 1970s - like the NWS LNG project as well back in the 1980s,) well a large resource and high possible production start up is what drives project economics and obviously AVZ has the resource. Let the DFS determine the feasibility as against the speculation here, but as I said AVZ is probably not the stock for anyone who wants quick money over the next few months.
On the issue of why I hold, just for you, I entered AVZ in July 2017 and played around with my holdings until late August 2017 (not buying any more since early Sept 2017). I also stated here that I sold a portion in November last year and therefore my stake is not that large here. Refer first paragraph in Post #:
30440935 as I have previously stated this as well. What I have left in AVZ I am happy to hold one way or another,
it is my decision. Given I am ruling out a TO option next 12 months, I might even enter the market at some point and buy some, only just a few (not go crazy by the way either) as I suspect that will be in a CGT discount before any TO comes (if one ever comes which I am doubtful about for at least the next 12 months).
If I see flip flop flap from management I will wait to my CGT discount and leave AVZ for good, i.e. I will be paying enough CGT this year even when I sell two shares I have that are in losses now, but we'll see because what is killing the SP IMO is lack of direction, not helped by the recent selling of the Chairman, but lack of direction was a key factor for last few months IMO.
The catalyst to upside is management decisions around we are moving this to mining, as against the sending out of mixed messages which has gone on for too long IMO. as I posted earlier. Anyone here for short term entry and exit thinking doubling in SP, I think this ain't a share for you. Those entering for a long term hold might be a worthwhile punt at these levels. But management direction is needed to instill confidence and to be frank I expect the Chairman to keep selling his free shares so personally I think he should be replaced IMO. His mind IMO is on not taking this to mining but on his next project so he needs to move on IMO (but suspect many here will disagree with this viewpoint).
Suspect SP will hover around the 9c - 15 c mark for the next few months IMO, based on nothing but gut feel, so it is a question of whether people want to build a stake here in the interim before the next major movement, which must come after JORC been management saying "
we have hired a,b and c to start feasibility studies and are signing Offtake Agreements with a, b or c". Not having a mining mindset and SP will drift further IMO. AVZ, flip flop flapping about won't cut the mustard is what I am saying - time for we are going to mine this thing and if taken over in the interim so be it.
So why do you keep floating around on these threads btw? Do you have an entry price you might take a punt? I provided my reasoning so over to you. And for some of the other non-holders be interested in their reasoning for constant posts here. I think both positive and negative views are a must in any forum, but I am not into one line upramping nor one line downramping posts either.
As I say, everyone dyor and invest when you are happy with your research - don't rely on HC for your investment decisions. And when you can, free or partial carry if possible (and that is advice on any share you might hold but I guess everyone has an investment strategy). This is the spec end of the market, balanced risks are aceptable because if you want more limited risks well invest in blue chips. I am still here because as I posted with the NPVs the project economics do stack up based on assumed inputs (which are not tested just assumptions) but obviously you won't know until a DFS and bankable study is done (and your guess is a tick or a cross but that is life).
As I said, what makes AVZ a good speculative stock is they have the resource, it is now a question of project economics. So if someone has a NPV they would like to share that has their cost assumptions and reasons why that would be good to see, rather than statements saying not profitable (because as I said at the start there is ample evidence f projects in remote regions having a large resource been viable to mine, it is a question of costs here and the tin/tantulum, as suspect spodumene prices will still remain above US$600 per tonne for at least the next 10 years - again a guess.
All IMO IMO IMO IMO
