Good research. I had PCY.TO in my initial Vanadium Peer Analysis...

Good research. I had PCY.TO in my initial Vanadium Peer Analysis spreadsheet. But dropped them due to low grades.

Interesting PCY benchmark themselves against LGO when it comes to market cap and production... but fail to benchmark against costs and grades. Typically good news is never hidden.

Largo has more than double the production size with 30% increase planned. By being in production now, they get the benefit of exposure to current high V prices allowing for quicker project pay-back.

Oh, and the bits PCY left out, the comparison to LGO costs:
LGO 2018 Guidance 4.00
PCY Forecast 4.77 or about 20% more
http://www.largoresources.com/operations/maracas-menchen-mine/default.aspx

LGO V Head Grade 1.15% and concentrate 3.2% (pit reserves)
PCY V head grade between 0.286-0.433% and concentrate not noted (more hidden good news?).

I hope people can understand the importance of grades. I keep banging on about it. Look at the difference in cost structure between PCY and LGO. And for those who argue near surface and low strip ratios... PCY also promote low strip ratio of 0.17. And still Largo wins hands down on a cost structure despite a strip ratio of 3.17.

As a comparison:
AVL base model PFS has strip ratio of 6.3 and costs of USD4.13
TMT PFS has strip ratio of 5.6 and costs of USD4.27

As we can see from these 4 examples. higher grades reduce costs more than lower strip ratios.