Lithiumstar AVZ Minerals eröffnet 68 % im Plus
Seite 141 von 286 Neuester Beitrag: 16.10.24 08:05 | ||||
Eröffnet am: | 02.02.17 09:24 | von: Balu4u | Anzahl Beiträge: | 8.131 |
Neuester Beitrag: | 16.10.24 08:05 | von: Shorty2018 | Leser gesamt: | 3.170.776 |
Forum: | Hot-Stocks | Leser heute: | 1.331 | |
Bewertet mit: | ||||
Seite: < 1 | ... | 139 | 140 | | 142 | 143 | ... 286 > |
Morning all,
To all shareholders who continue to publicly criticise (if not defame) NF and are basing their negative sentiment for AVZ on missed timelines and a former strategic advisor who apparently did no wrong but recently sold at least some of his holdings,
I ask that you seek to fully understand the motives and reasons behind the series of fortunate and unfortunate events that have transpired since 2017, before passing your judgement and mouthing off like a spoilt tennis brat in public.
And when you've finally calmed down i.e. following my suggestion that you may have slightly misunderstood the corporate history of AVZ (since 2017) and are possibly pointing the finger at the wrong person, then perhaps with a sense of humbleness you may decide to question your incessant beliefs and ask yourselves the following important and very relevant questions:
Question 1: What experience and success did AG have in terms of securing OT agreements i.e. prior to their appointment of 'strategic advisor to AVZ' back in 2017?
Question 2: Under who's leadership was AG appointed AVZ's strategic advisor?
Question 3: Who advised AVZ's management on the aggressive timetable to construction back in 2017, and for what purpose?
Question 4: Who was ultimately responsible for signing off on that timetable and which individuals would have most likely benefited from any TO during a time when Lithium Boom 1.0 was in full swing? i.e. prior to selling their shares and options.
Question 5: Who hasn't sold a single share during that time, nor since they were appointed MD in 2018?
Question 6: Why were AG unable to secure better terms for a CR in late 2018 / early 2019 than the 'price without a floor' deal that was put together last minute between management and Patto's? i.e. when it was apparent that AG had sufficient time and autonomy to secure a better deal for shareholders.
Question 7: Was the lapsing of AG's contract and the willingness by AVZ management to directly engage with Huayou (via a formal visit to China) the green light for Huayou to seek to enhance their relationship with AVZ by 'executing a strategic relationship agreement' thereafter?
Personally, I think NF and the current BOD made a sound decision to let AG's contract lapse, especially under existing non-performance based terms that clearly rewarded AG without success. Please note that I'm not claiming to know the entire story behind closed doors, however the above questions are IMO crucial to the debate as to whether AG's 'strategic' involvement with AVZ was a wise decision / choice to begin with.
The below tweet caught my attention over the weekend, and although it is my belief that the author revels in the attention he receives from his self-proclaimed 'Cynical and Cranky take on the ASX professional company manipulators', I do think in this case he has a valid point.
Moving forward, my Balinese taxi driver had previously hinted that at least one of the 'non-exclusive strategic advisors' that AVZ has appointed in recent times was purposely head-hunted for their significant experience in securing OT agreements. He namedropped 'Glencore' and 'Mitsui' as part of this individual's long list of achievements. My question (but not really) is why would AVZ appoint this person now and well prior to the DFS?
SP movements and musings
With regards to AVZ's SP ebbs and flows driven by reasonable volumes, the good news is that for every AVZ seller there has always been a willing buyer ready and waiting. For example, ML's recent and rapid sell down of his options holding (in 250k lots) has resulted in a golden opportunity for some IMO, and at least 1.2m of those options that I know of passing into very safe hands (my hands).
Also, there has been mention of the increased holding of Ying Nominees in recent months (now a Top 6 shareholder).
My Balinese Taxi driver informs me that they're a WA based accounting firm who are 'firm' believers (pun intended) in AVZ and their project at Manono. Accounting firms are typically good with figures, and so I'd opine that Ying Nominees have been quietly confident in their assessment of AVZ's recent 5mtpa SS, and the enormous opportunity at Manono within a exponentially growing market (by say 2021-2022).
Lastly, I wanted to talk a little about investor psychology.
It bemuses me how easily retail investors often get themselves in a panic when the SP of a popular stock that they own drops by a few pips, and all of a sudden a rush of nonsensical posts appear - with many citing re-hashed fundamental concerns (most of which have been known and repeated for months if not years) in an attempt to justify the day’s fall.
However, the more probable scenario is that someone has simply decided to sell a decent parcel of shares - possibly to pay for the purchase of another stock or to seek re-entry at lower price or to pay for personal items or expenses such as a tax bill, personal loan, holiday, rent or a new car. This sudden movement typically triggers a bit of senseless panic among the jittery which then triggers more senseless panic and stop losses, sometimes resulting in a 5-10% loss for the day. And it is then that they ask themselves ‘what was that all about?’ when perhaps it is about nothing much at all, other that someone decided to sell up for the reasons I’ve mentioned above.
SP manipulation (or the attempting of) is unfortunately as common as mud nowadays and often contributes to the day's outcome or result. However with regards to AVZ, the volume that brought about yesterday’s fall of ~6% was all said and done less than 10 million shares - not particularly big by AVZ’s lofty standards. However, that didn’t stop the scaremongering and nonsensical posts ranging from 'Ebola' to 'Manono will never be mined by AVZ' to 'ML is selling, therefore many tunes have changed and btw NF is a c**t.'
But hey tomorrow's a new day and I'm hearing that news re: Met Test results (apparently Nagrom were all ) is very close. Combine this with the 5mtpa SS, AVZ's increased equity stake in Manono, the recent appointment of GR Engineering (DFS) and NF's insightful interview from Frankfurt, and one can see that the missing pieces are slowly but surely coming together.
Thus any further forced selling of AVZ at this incredibly low valuation IMO (~$100m EV) prior to Met Test results may provide one of the best opportunities / entry points in H2 2019 (and indeed beyond) for savvy investors and traders alike.
GLTA
Cheers
Elpha
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/...11732/page-21178?post_id=39552319
Des Weiteren hat der User "Rainer Zerrarth", erster Kommentar, auch geschrieben, das H2-Antriebe Akkus mit Li benötigen...jemand anderes hier aus dem Forum hatte das selbe vor Kurzem auch erwähnt. Ich finde im Netz leider keine Angaben zu den dazu benötigten Mengen...Die interessante Frage für uns ist doch die: wird beim H2-Antrieb weniger, gleichviel oder gar mehr Li benötigt?
Der Wirkunsgrad einer Brennstoffstlle im mobilen Betrieb liegt heute noch bei deutlich unter 40 %.
Die Haltbarkeit einer Brennstoffstelle im mobilen Betrieb ist, im Vergleich zu anderen alternativen Antriebssystemen mit max vier Jahren relativ gering. Die Kosten dagegen sehr hoch.
Die Frage ist also, wie lange es dauern wird, bis man eine Lösung konzipiert hat, die dann tatsächlich alltagstauglich und zugleich bezahlbar ist.
Rein aus dem Bauch heraus würde ich annehmen, dass beim Brennstoffzellenbetrieb ein deutlich kleinerer Akku ausreichen könnte, da ja kontinuierlich Energie durch die Brennstoffzelle nachgeführt wird.
Insgesamt scheint die Sache (für den mobilen Betrieb in Pkw), so ist jedenfalls mein Eindruck aus dem recht spärlichen Informationsfundus, noch einige Jahre an Zeit zu benötigen.
Anders könnte es bei quasi stationären Anlagen, wie auf Schiffen, aussehen.
hier schreiben viele, dass auch bei der brennstoffzellenproduktion lithium benötigt wird. 20 % mehr als bei der lithium batterie. in welchem verhältnis? wo finde ich diese aussage? hat da jemand mal einen link, wo man den vergleich sehen kann?
also 20% mehr wurde behauptet, als bei einer reinen lithium bat, so wie sie jetzt für die e-autos vorgesehen ist. und ein brennstoffzelle benötigt 20 % mehr ?
Die Metallurgiedaten kommen wahrscheinlich erst im Oktober, so eine schriftliche Info von NF.
Irre. Niemand weiß, wir man auf sowas kommt.
Derweil gurkt das Ding ständig nur negativ herum. Heute immerhin mal ein (korrigierendes) Plus.
Langford scheint auch raus zu sein. Spricht doch Bände...
wenn er wirklich komplett raus ist, würde mir das zumindest zu denken geben.
Und komm mir jetzt nicht mir Airguide. Das hat mit der privat Person ML nichts zu tun.
Wenn du einen Beleg dafür hast kannst du gerne so etwas hier gerne publizieren aber nicht wenn es deine an den Haaren herbeigezogene Wunschvorstellung ist.
Ansonsten heute positiv. Mal sehen ob es wieder nur eine Nebelkerze ist. Wäre schön wenn nicht....
und ml...
wenn der alle seine anteile verkaufen würde, dann würden wir das auch merken ;)
kommt ja bald eine neue liste
Was die Privatperson Langford macht oder plant, weiß ich natürlich nicht.
Fakt ist, dass es unter Klaus E. besser lief. Den möchte ich aber trotzdem nicht mehr im Management sehen.
Ich hab hier viel Geld verloren. Und wie ich sehe, war ich gut beraten hier auszusteigen. Könnte jetzt ja tiefer wieder einsteigen. Will ich aber nicht.
Und wie gesagt: hier phantasieren Leute Kurse von 4-5 AUD.
Davon sind wir weiter weg als vom Mars.
Liebe Grüsse
Aber die Logik verstehe ich nicht charles. Meines Wissens nach bist du bei 2,5 Cent ausgestiegen. Warum bist du froh raus zu sein obwohl du bei 3,5 aktuellem Kurs einiges weniger Geld verloren hättest.
Wenn du froh bist weil der mentale Stress den man bei einem Stock durchaus manachmal haben kann weg ist verstehe ich das eher.. das ist nicht jedermanns Sache
Das TO Szenario, ob wünschenswert oder nicht ist also wahrscheinlich erst mitte der 2020er Jahre interessant.
http://www.financial.de/kolumnen/...einem-kleinen-explorer-anbandelt/
Andere Hersteller könnten Lithium nehmen, aber es bleibt eine relativ kleine Batterie als Pufferspeicher. Keine hohen Anforderungen an die Qualität.
Aber.... Es dauert noch Jahrzehnte die H2 Technik im PKW zu betablieren -es ist teuer und ineffizient. Ich sehe H2 nur bei Grossen Maschinen. LKW, Bahnen, Schiffe.
Correct me if you differ but @Deboss is looking at the Magnetic : non magnetic characterisation testing, which resulted in the low iron content data point.
So, if you note the ‘calculated head’ which in most instances hovers around 0.4% that’s the critical data point, which explains AVZ confidently adopting Nagrom’s data to publish it on the ASX platform, in October 2018:
The mean concentrations of “penalty” elements are low.
0.1% F, 0.3% P2O5 and 0.4% Fe2O3
and later, this year in May 2019 presentation noting the same data points for iron along with other deleterious elements; phosphorous and fluorine.
The key issue with deleterious elements appears to be with the calciner, hence how much iron (as example) can be removed before any melting.
Comparing to PLS that made quite a few tests starting 2015, there is similar data points for technical grade.
What difficult to ascertain is what are the conditions for each testing program, for example the “mean concentration” for deleterious elements, one has to ask how much of a synopsis that data point is for the whole resource.
As we can see for PLS with about seven (7) zonations, the resource only has a quasi-homogenous character to it. Hence less reliable even when from same supplier for an upstream processor than a JORC defined “homogenous” resource with a low strip ratio for extraction like AVZ’s Roche Dure and CDL Pegmatites.
Further MET testing would likely define the metallurgical characteristics for Roche Dure, and likely a vote of confidence from an offtake party. Bear in mind the the market as whole is much wiser about specifications and tightening those specifications going forward with battery technology and safety demands.
So below 1% if not below 0.5% consistently is likely AVZ’s target with minimal processing aka a DMS recovery process plant. SC 6.3% has been achieved already with this DMS recovery so if they tap out a flotation circuit and just keep DMS recovery alone that’s a potential saving to the tune of millions of USD; exactly how much I’m not sure. But you can see where this is going in terms of economics for a start up.
Then there’s tax holidays, but that’s offtopic...
Fact is, Manono is the next Greenbushes in terms of product with tin credit likely to be very credit worthy...
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/....4869631/page-19?post_id=39669727
Die erste Charge der Metallurgiestudie ist zwar fast fertig, bzw. im Moment in der Überprüfung, aber damit ist die Studie noch längst nicht fertig.
Das endgültige, sogenannte bankable, Ergebnis ist erst für den Oktober zu erwarten.
Bis dahin, sofern dieser Zeitplan überhaupt eingehalten werden kann (was bei AVZ leider nicht unbedingt üblich ist) sind es noch etwa 3 Monate.
Wenn in dieser Zeit keine guten News, welche auch immer, publiziert werden, könnte der Kurs erneut in Richtung 0,025 €ct erodieren.
Hinzu kommt, dass die Chinesen, also CATL und andere MoU-Partner, sich noch immer in auffälliger Zurückhaltung üben.
Die seit einiger Zeit deutlich intensivierte mediale Behandlung der zukünftigen Antriebsart für die Millionen von Pkw, die auf eine solide und bezahlbare Batterielösung warten, hat zwar dazu geführt, das CATL und Andere große Produktionsanlagen planen und bauen, die Rohstoffe dafür aber offenbar nicht knapp genug sind, um für AVZ zu konkreten OT-Verträgen zu führen.
Zumindest ist noch genug Geld da
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=YqcdnxBICAw