As soon as get a little momentum, out comes a 1.1 million sell...

As soon as get a little momentum, out comes a 1.1 million sell order at 3.1 c that then removes buyers at 2.8c - 3.0 cents (who have withdrawn bids).  LOL

In terms of the other topic been debated here over the last 10 hours, I hope the non-AVL holders realisewe are talking here vanadium that will be sold at 98% Min gradespecs.  

We arenot talking about selling, for example, copper concentrate (yes I know we have vanadium) that grades 30% inthe concentrate.  But even if we were talking a similar concept as copper concentrate, the stuff you needto remove from the copper in the concentrate downstream, and if it has certainimpurities that are difficult to remove, then the price you actually get is notequivalent to 30% of the LME copper price for example.  Treatment and refining chargesare going to be passed onto the seller of the concentrate in the pricingstructure by the buyer.

But Idigress, what is going to be sold from Oz is 98% grade V205 or 99.5% grade(meaning Oz bears those costs and the processing costs for getting there). So if you have low vanadium in the ore your capex costs will be larger as needmore feed ore to get to the required grade, as well as more processing costs tostrip out the junk. 

Now interms of AVL, yes the the recovery rates in the oxidised areas are lower thanin the non-oxidised sections but metallurgical work is going on there and yesthat will be priced into an IRR and without going over this issue again I'lljust refer redaers to these posts and its embedded content.  Don't really want torepeat myself again.

Post #: 35633846

Post #: 36477923

Post #: 36075882

The factthe SS shows feasibility here, and I suspect the PFS will too,  suggests to me AVL also have an idea on what theywill get from the MET tests, given who their advisors/consultants were as partof the SS work (so really they just need to confirm their 'idea' by actually doingthe tests and getting there).  If the MET tests show a recovery of greaterthan 42%, from recollection, in the top layers of the oxidised zone that wouldbe a major positive here given the  high recovery rates in the freshlayers.  In other words this is going to be a key assumption in the PFS and one I suspect will change at DFS stage.  In the fresh layers recovery rates are much higher.  As I said I suspect this is what is providing the difficulties inthe PFS (and the optimisation strategy for capex/opex) given the differentrecovery rates currently assumed in the differing layers of the deposit for, I suspect, thePFS itself (given the much higher recovery rates in the non-oxidised areas and what was previously talked about in the SS).

All IMO