Back

Latest Forum Topics / Alita Resources    Last:0.078 --

Post Reply

alliance mineral resources move up Post Reply Rate topic
EmmGru Veteran	27-Apr-2017 13:29        EmmGru About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	My personal reaction to funds aka BB coming in is similar to when a director buy shares in the Co. Not equivalent but similar becos both are in position to have more access to management and more info abt the prospects of the Co. So I take as a positive signal. Also, more shares held by BB normally mean less free float becos they hold longer (not a die hard rule) and more px stability. Plus, if the Co ever need to raise capital again, easier to get support if already have BB on the register. And possibly share px support becos already vested BB will spot a deal when px fall and buy more. They would already have done their DD and easier to get approval to buy more vs invest in new Co they dun know. Like for eg. Noble, its share px shot up when there was news of new strategic investor coming in earlier even when nobody knew what px the investor will come in yet. The financial support / stability that wld be provided was already a strong support. But Noble is another story lah, just quoting an example. RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 13:06) Posted: Good point. It is often difficult to rationalize what a retail investor may think with a share placement...some may be thinking that when share placement complete the market will be flooded with new shares so price will fall...so they thinking " oh I sell now, then when market flooded I grab cheaper" ....not all think like that but some...others may be thinking that as various hurdles to get over before end of year if production starts then they simply going to wait... EmmGru      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:42) Posted: Understand lah but if think from BB' s point of view - they fork out A$15m lump sum and get price available to any man on the street? BBs used to getting sweeteners on their deals. And if px rise to 35 cents, it will be in part that financing has been secured and the deal is financially sound, which is after the pte placement is acheived. So BBs deserve to earn their small discount that makes the 35 cents possible in future. And the A$15m is fully pte placement, retailers will never get in on it.... so its not like they are selling now and can subscribe new shares at 25 cents from Co. Retailers get a bit miffed in the short-term becos think some prefer Taw let share px shoot up in response to off-take, then do capital raising can raise more $ with less dilution. But maybe the CEO knows BB will still press price to 25 cents becos they will also look at average price and not just the last traded price.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
risktaker Supreme	27-Apr-2017 13:26        risktaker About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "Posts are opinions. Do not take it as investment advise "
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	buying   33c @ 100k per trade up to 5million share pls msg me papayaface      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:51) Posted: Please lah. Dont sia suay yourself. You must be cocky to think some nut would sell you at 32 cents. Even shortists  level peg  selling at 40 cts.  Crazy  guy. Good luck    risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:33) Posted: i am looking for married deal interested seller please whisper me ... buying at 100k shares @32
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
pool100 Veteran	27-Apr-2017 13:24        pool100 About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	All the risk is on TAW to secure financing. They' re not the owners and just operators. The onus is on them to perform. AM is the mine owner. Basically it is risk free for them. TAW will do all the dirty work and financing while AM will reap the benefits.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RedEye1811 Master	27-Apr-2017 13:06        RedEye1811 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Good point. It is often difficult to rationalize what a retail investor may think with a share placement...some may be thinking that when share placement complete the market will be flooded with new shares so price will fall...so they thinking " oh I sell now, then when market flooded I grab cheaper" ....not all think like that but some...others may be thinking that as various hurdles to get over before end of year if production starts then they simply going to wait... EmmGru      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:42) Posted: Understand lah but if think from BB' s point of view - they fork out A$15m lump sum and get price available to any man on the street? BBs used to getting sweeteners on their deals. And if px rise to 35 cents, it will be in part that financing has been secured and the deal is financially sound, which is after the pte placement is acheived. So BBs deserve to earn their small discount that makes the 35 cents possible in future. And the A$15m is fully pte placement, retailers will never get in on it.... so its not like they are selling now and can subscribe new shares at 25 cents from Co. Retailers get a bit miffed in the short-term becos think some prefer Taw let share px shoot up in response to off-take, then do capital raising can raise more $ with less dilution. But maybe the CEO knows BB will still press price to 25 cents becos they will also look at average price and not just the last traded price.   RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:31) Posted: The decline in Tawana share price is got some overhang from private placement...people are seeing the 25c private placement price and thinking " oh that the value" and are pushing to it...others may feel that till the private placement done why should they pay higher if they perceive the placement dilutes their holding...for example if buy at 35c now and then private placement some may feel the value of their holding will decrease automatically to something lower....so they holding fire...people need to look at this long-term (at least Q1 2018) and that just have to go through some steps...
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
NoRiskNoGain Veteran	27-Apr-2017 12:54        NoRiskNoGain About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Any news on the lifting on suspension? furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:53) Posted: So brings me to re read Farm in agreement again. TAwana don' t earn tantalum revenue unless they fulfil the capital spending commitment of A$12.5mil. By end 2019. So this means 100% of tantalum credit is to Alliance for now. Tawana is putting the capital but don' t necessary benefit 50%.  Let me do another way of calculation Us$930 per ton of spodumene at 140k per ton production cost. Spodumene revenue per year is A$173mil. Alliance CEO said 100% tantalum revenue to over 100%production cost. I suspect it only 50% share that Alliance have. So it means A$23.9mil from Tantalum revenue to cover 50% of spodumene revenue which is A$173mil / 2 = A86.5mil. This works out to be about A$341per ton of production cost for alliance only which is much more realistic. This also means Tawana is paying all the capex but actually get less than 50% revenue for now. Just a ballpark calculation. I wouldn' t hold Tawana   in this case.   furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:38) Posted: Based reverse engineering, I put it in another perspective. Now I calculate the estimated revenue of tantalum. They will producing estimated 300k pounds of tantalum yearly. Assuming a current us$60 per pound of tantalum price, Estimated yearly Tantalum revenue to be A$23.9mil. Still assuming 100% tantalum revenue = 100% production cost, this means that A$23.9mil is estimated to be the production cost of average annual 140k tons of spodumene. This also means the average per ton cost of spodumene is A$170.7. This value is so much less than the A$484 per ton production cost estimated by canaccord that it doesn' t make sense.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
furnaces Veteran	27-Apr-2017 12:53        furnaces About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	So brings me to re read Farm in agreement again. TAwana don' t earn tantalum revenue unless they fulfil the capital spending commitment of A$12.5mil. By end 2019. So this means 100% of tantalum credit is to Alliance for now. Tawana is putting the capital but don' t necessary benefit 50%.  Let me do another way of calculation Us$930 per ton of spodumene at 140k per ton production cost. Spodumene revenue per year is A$173mil. Alliance CEO said 100% tantalum revenue to over 100%production cost. I suspect it only 50% share that Alliance have. So it means A$23.9mil from Tantalum revenue to cover 50% of spodumene revenue which is A$173mil / 2 = A86.5mil. This works out to be about A$341per ton of production cost for alliance only which is much more realistic. This also means Tawana is paying all the capex but actually get less than 50% revenue for now. Just a ballpark calculation. I wouldn' t hold Tawana   in this case.   furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:38) Posted: Based reverse engineering, I put it in another perspective. Now I calculate the estimated revenue of tantalum. They will producing estimated 300k pounds of tantalum yearly. Assuming a current us$60 per pound of tantalum price, Estimated yearly Tantalum revenue to be A$23.9mil. Still assuming 100% tantalum revenue = 100% production cost, this means that A$23.9mil is estimated to be the production cost of average annual 140k tons of spodumene. This also means the average per ton cost of spodumene is A$170.7. This value is so much less than the A$484 per ton production cost estimated by canaccord that it doesn' t make sense.               RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:44) Posted: This one key point I got from ST article as well. If true then it does really boost the bottomline because it basically means the full revenue from lithium concentrate is also the earnings. Of course there will be various cost not related to production (eg. finance from any loans, director fees, audit   fees, taxes) that would still come of the bottomline, but these are very unlikely to knock the net earnings of the planet. Being conservative perhaps could say the costs I mentioned (including tax) is about 25% of total revenue. So net earnings based on your figures could be adjusted to SG$67.5 million. The EPS on this (482,764,000 shares now) is about 13.98c. P/E*6 = 83.89c P/E*8 = $1.12 P/E*10 = $1.40 P/E*12 = $1.68. Of course this very rough with number of inputs missing so could easily be off by miles either higher or lower.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
papayaface Supreme	27-Apr-2017 12:51        papayaface About Contact  Quote this Post!   Yells: "This is the best time to enter....when everythings uncertain"
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Please lah. Dont sia suay yourself. You must be cocky to think some nut would sell you at 32 cents. Even shortists  level peg  selling at 40 cts.  Crazy  guy. Good luck    risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:33) Posted: i am looking for married deal interested seller please whisper me ... buying at 100k shares @32
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RedEye1811 Master	27-Apr-2017 12:49        RedEye1811 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	It is quite difficult for us to reconcile the numbers as we only got part of the information on both sides...we do not know for example how conservative Canaccord were being with their estimates...so they could have pumped up this far more to be conservative...and they may have taken in some additional costs that not merely considering the tantalum revenue....at end we need more details...but if we are all digging and finding and contributing we can find a clearer figure... furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:38) Posted: Based reverse engineering, I put it in another perspective. Now I calculate the estimated revenue of tantalum. They will producing estimated 300k pounds of tantalum yearly. Assuming a current us$60 per pound of tantalum price, Estimated yearly Tantalum revenue to be A$23.9mil. Still assuming 100% tantalum revenue = 100% production cost, this means that A$23.9mil is estimated to be the production cost of average annual 140k tons of spodumene. This also means the average per ton cost of spodumene is A$170.7. This value is so much less than the A$484 per ton production cost estimated by canaccord that it doesn' t make sense.               RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:44) Posted: This one key point I got from ST article as well. If true then it does really boost the bottomline because it basically means the full revenue from lithium concentrate is also the earnings. Of course there will be various cost not related to production (eg. finance from any loans, director fees, audit   fees, taxes) that would still come of the bottomline, but these are very unlikely to knock the net earnings of the planet. Being conservative perhaps could say the costs I mentioned (including tax) is about 25% of total revenue. So net earnings based on your figures could be adjusted to SG$67.5 million. The EPS on this (482,764,000 shares now) is about 13.98c. P/E*6 = 83.89c P/E*8 = $1.12 P/E*10 = $1.40 P/E*12 = $1.68. Of course this very rough with number of inputs missing so could easily be off by miles either higher or lower.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
EmmGru Veteran	27-Apr-2017 12:42        EmmGru About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Understand lah but if think from BB' s point of view - they fork out A$15m lump sum and get price available to any man on the street? BBs used to getting sweeteners on their deals. And if px rise to 35 cents, it will be in part that financing has been secured and the deal is financially sound, which is after the pte placement is acheived. So BBs deserve to earn their small discount that makes the 35 cents possible in future. And the A$15m is fully pte placement, retailers will never get in on it.... so its not like they are selling now and can subscribe new shares at 25 cents from Co. Retailers get a bit miffed in the short-term becos think some prefer Taw let share px shoot up in response to off-take, then do capital raising can raise more $ with less dilution. But maybe the CEO knows BB will still press price to 25 cents becos they will also look at average price and not just the last traded price.   RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 12:31) Posted: The decline in Tawana share price is got some overhang from private placement...people are seeing the 25c private placement price and thinking " oh that the value" and are pushing to it...others may feel that till the private placement done why should they pay higher if they perceive the placement dilutes their holding...for example if buy at 35c now and then private placement some may feel the value of their holding will decrease automatically to something lower....so they holding fire...people need to look at this long-term (at least Q1 2018) and that just have to go through some steps... EmmGru      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:56) Posted: The other time AMAL/TAW joint announcement abt resource findings so positive, next day AMAL got sold down to 26 cents before rebounding to 33 cents. Dump then buy up cheap.  Also possible since TAW lift suspension so suddenly when we expected them to lift on Friday, some retailers don' t realise start trading already. And there are always retailers who take negative spin from good news. We have a lot of those in this forum too.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
furnaces Veteran	27-Apr-2017 12:38        furnaces About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Based reverse engineering, I put it in another perspective. Now I calculate the estimated revenue of tantalum. They will producing estimated 300k pounds of tantalum yearly. Assuming a current us$60 per pound of tantalum price, Estimated yearly Tantalum revenue to be A$23.9mil. Still assuming 100% tantalum revenue = 100% production cost, this means that A$23.9mil is estimated to be the production cost of average annual 140k tons of spodumene. This also means the average per ton cost of spodumene is A$170.7. This value is so much less than the A$484 per ton production cost estimated by canaccord that it doesn' t make sense.               RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:44) Posted: This one key point I got from ST article as well. If true then it does really boost the bottomline because it basically means the full revenue from lithium concentrate is also the earnings. Of course there will be various cost not related to production (eg. finance from any loans, director fees, audit   fees, taxes) that would still come of the bottomline, but these are very unlikely to knock the net earnings of the planet. Being conservative perhaps could say the costs I mentioned (including tax) is about 25% of total revenue. So net earnings based on your figures could be adjusted to SG$67.5 million. The EPS on this (482,764,000 shares now) is about 13.98c. P/E*6 = 83.89c P/E*8 = $1.12 P/E*10 = $1.40 P/E*12 = $1.68. Of course this very rough with number of inputs missing so could easily be off by miles either higher or lower. furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 10:37) Posted: Another note from today's strategies article. CEO says Tantalum credit is more than enough to cover for the production cost. So assuming no flow over. 100% Tantalum revenue to cover 100% of the production cost, which makes lithium concentrate free. So I did a recalculation again. Target average about 140k ton per annum of lithium concentrate. (120k to 160k) Us$880 per ton. Assuming 6.3% li20 is about us$925 per ton. Total lithium concentrate revenue will be us$925 x 140000 = S$180mil 50% to Alliance will be gross profit of S$90mil per year. Put a conservative 8x PE = S$720mil market cap. An increase from my previous estimation.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
risktaker Supreme	27-Apr-2017 12:33        risktaker About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "Posts are opinions. Do not take it as investment advise "
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	i am looking for married deal interested seller please whisper me ... buying at 100k shares @32
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RedEye1811 Master	27-Apr-2017 12:31        RedEye1811 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The decline in Tawana share price is got some overhang from private placement...people are seeing the 25c private placement price and thinking " oh that the value" and are pushing to it...others may feel that till the private placement done why should they pay higher if they perceive the placement dilutes their holding...for example if buy at 35c now and then private placement some may feel the value of their holding will decrease automatically to something lower....so they holding fire...people need to look at this long-term (at least Q1 2018) and that just have to go through some steps... EmmGru      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:56) Posted: The other time AMAL/TAW joint announcement abt resource findings so positive, next day AMAL got sold down to 26 cents before rebounding to 33 cents. Dump then buy up cheap.  Also possible since TAW lift suspension so suddenly when we expected them to lift on Friday, some retailers don' t realise start trading already. And there are always retailers who take negative spin from good news. We have a lot of those in this forum too. tankookoo      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:28) Posted: TAWANA RESOURCES  in Australia dropped around to 24.5 cents from 27 cents   hmm...news is postive but something reatilers dun know??
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
EmmGru Veteran	27-Apr-2017 12:20        EmmGru About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The tantalum offtake agreement should also come with some upfront payment, further reducing need for AMAL to do any capital raising. The Tawana shareholders selling out now and below 25 cents not thinking straight lah. For pte placement to BB, it always come with small discount to last traded and average px. Retailers just have to accept that BBs get better deals. And the 25 cents is now the new support px and the fact that the capital raising was oversubscribed is very good sign. BBs perform due diligence before going into pte placement. amlithiumpower      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:56) Posted: Good post.    Seriously, party A do not have the money to buy an asset go and borrow money to buy half the asset from party B. If the share price of party A do not perform I understand, why always like to link to party B when they already have the asset? And now party B might have a positive offtake agreement whereby party A do not have a share yet. Party B ask for suspension as they need more time for offtake agreement. Party A still need shareholders approval before confirming they can raise total $15m. So now you got $1, which party will you place your bet on?   RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:27) Posted: I have tried to view this objectively working through some numbers and just a few thoughts: 1. Canaccord analyst estimated they would require approximately AU$45 million pre-production capex. With AU$25 million from Burwill and AU$15 million from TAW capital raising this gives AU$40 million. This more or less covers the pre-production capex. On this basis AMAL can perhaps feel confident AMAL is NOT going to do a capital raising that will dilute our holdings (if vested). 2. If AMAL gets a confirmed contract with Mitsubishi that will get production going in August then this will more than likely cover the cash flow requirement prior to the first delivery. My take on this is it will reduce the need for debt financing for W/C purposes, thus keeping cost finance cost downs thus improving bottomline. Also, if a reliable cash flow is in place before lithium output comes online then reduces risk TAW and AMAL will need to do further capital raising so again current shareholders of AMAL may face less risk of share dilution. 3. As pointed out by furnaces, if we assume what the CEO of AMAL says is accurate an revenue from tantalum output would offset the lithium production costs, then it can be see the revenue from lithium sales would more or less be straight profit. If that the case then the basic EPS will be far higher than without the offset. (Naturally should be other costs so not escaping that but EPS will be better). 4. As investors we need to be mindful of the various milestones before the first delivery. Thus, we should be realistic that share price may not jump straight to top of the queue immediately but will be a series of steps such as JORC, commissioning of mine, finishing of infrastructure build and first delivery. But as may be a series of steps than a single rocket, this can provide current and interested retail investors better chance to grab holdings at better value that likely produce the big return when first delivery made. Rather than go in all at once can grab gradually. A key step for examine would be the JORC report. As noted in ST article they cannot say how much is in the mine till independently verified. But while they not saying how much one can perhaps read between the lines and form the assumption it must be something meaningful. Without giving the AMAL and TAW directors too much credit it should be reasonable not to presume they trying to run some fraud. And if they did not think they had a decent bundle of resources would they put their heads on the chopping block to start capital raising, putting themselves legally liable taking advance and so forth if they did not feel something meaningful there. And one can say that the JORC could come out with something different, it is only reasonable to think it would be quite ' bad luck' if the first place they drilled was the only place on entire area with lithium (yes, could be true but being practical can probably lean to feeling something exists).
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
furnaces Veteran	27-Apr-2017 11:56        furnaces About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Gut feel is next week also. Likely signing of offtake to take place over the weekend. tankookoo      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:49) Posted: i think likely open on 2 may.   risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:44) Posted: Donno tmr open buy or wait for it to dro
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
EmmGru Veteran	27-Apr-2017 11:56        EmmGru About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	The other time AMAL/TAW joint announcement abt resource findings so positive, next day AMAL got sold down to 26 cents before rebounding to 33 cents. Dump then buy up cheap.  Also possible since TAW lift suspension so suddenly when we expected them to lift on Friday, some retailers don' t realise start trading already. And there are always retailers who take negative spin from good news. We have a lot of those in this forum too. tankookoo      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:28) Posted: TAWANA RESOURCES  in Australia dropped around to 24.5 cents from 27 cents   hmm...news is postive but something reatilers dun know??  EmmGru      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 10:49) Posted: With the publicity in Straits times today and the trading break, the enterprising singaporean will have time to deposit money with broker
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
amlithiumpower Senior	27-Apr-2017 11:56        amlithiumpower About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Good post.    Seriously, party A do not have the money to buy an asset go and borrow money to buy half the asset from party B. If the share price of party A do not perform I understand, why always like to link to party B when they already have the asset? And now party B might have a positive offtake agreement whereby party A do not have a share yet. Party B ask for suspension as they need more time for offtake agreement. Party A still need shareholders approval before confirming they can raise total $15m. So now you got $1, which party will you place your bet on?   RedEye1811      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:27) Posted: I have tried to view this objectively working through some numbers and just a few thoughts: 1. Canaccord analyst estimated they would require approximately AU$45 million pre-production capex. With AU$25 million from Burwill and AU$15 million from TAW capital raising this gives AU$40 million. This more or less covers the pre-production capex. On this basis AMAL can perhaps feel confident AMAL is NOT going to do a capital raising that will dilute our holdings (if vested). 2. If AMAL gets a confirmed contract with Mitsubishi that will get production going in August then this will more than likely cover the cash flow requirement prior to the first delivery. My take on this is it will reduce the need for debt financing for W/C purposes, thus keeping cost finance cost downs thus improving bottomline. Also, if a reliable cash flow is in place before lithium output comes online then reduces risk TAW and AMAL will need to do further capital raising so again current shareholders of AMAL may face less risk of share dilution. 3. As pointed out by furnaces, if we assume what the CEO of AMAL says is accurate an revenue from tantalum output would offset the lithium production costs, then it can be see the revenue from lithium sales would more or less be straight profit. If that the case then the basic EPS will be far higher than without the offset. (Naturally should be other costs so not escaping that but EPS will be better). 4. As investors we need to be mindful of the various milestones before the first delivery. Thus, we should be realistic that share price may not jump straight to top of the queue immediately but will be a series of steps such as JORC, commissioning of mine, finishing of infrastructure build and first delivery. But as may be a series of steps than a single rocket, this can provide current and interested retail investors better chance to grab holdings at better value that likely produce the big return when first delivery made. Rather than go in all at once can grab gradually. A key step for examine would be the JORC report. As noted in ST article they cannot say how much is in the mine till independently verified. But while they not saying how much one can perhaps read between the lines and form the assumption it must be something meaningful. Without giving the AMAL and TAW directors too much credit it should be reasonable not to presume they trying to run some fraud. And if they did not think they had a decent bundle of resources would they put their heads on the chopping block to start capital raising, putting themselves legally liable taking advance and so forth if they did not feel something meaningful there. And one can say that the JORC could come out with something different, it is only reasonable to think it would be quite ' bad luck' if the first place they drilled was the only place on entire area with lithium (yes, could be true but being practical can probably lean to feeling something exists).
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
tankookoo Master	27-Apr-2017 11:49        tankookoo About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	i think likely open on 2 may.   risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:44) Posted: Donno tmr open buy or wait for it to drop huatahrr      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:42) Posted: look ok...minor up and down
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
risktaker Supreme	27-Apr-2017 11:44        risktaker About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Flexible   Mood: Yells: "Posts are opinions. Do not take it as investment advise "
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	Donno tmr open buy or wait for it to drop huatahrr      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:42) Posted: look ok...minor up and down risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:32) Posted: Looks like gone case T.T why big boy throw......like that how to buy alliance zzz
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
RedEye1811 Master	27-Apr-2017 11:44        RedEye1811 About Contact  Quote this Post! Style: Combined   Mood:
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	This one key point I got from ST article as well. If true then it does really boost the bottomline because it basically means the full revenue from lithium concentrate is also the earnings. Of course there will be various cost not related to production (eg. finance from any loans, director fees, audit   fees, taxes) that would still come of the bottomline, but these are very unlikely to knock the net earnings of the planet. Being conservative perhaps could say the costs I mentioned (including tax) is about 25% of total revenue. So net earnings based on your figures could be adjusted to SG$67.5 million. The EPS on this (482,764,000 shares now) is about 13.98c. P/E*6 = 83.89c P/E*8 = $1.12 P/E*10 = $1.40 P/E*12 = $1.68. Of course this very rough with number of inputs missing so could easily be off by miles either higher or lower. furnaces      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 10:37) Posted: Another note from today's strategies article. CEO says Tantalum credit is more than enough to cover for the production cost. So assuming no flow over. 100% Tantalum revenue to cover 100% of the production cost, which makes lithium concentrate free. So I did a recalculation again. Target average about 140k ton per annum of lithium concentrate. (120k to 160k) Us$880 per ton. Assuming 6.3% li20 is about us$925 per ton. Total lithium concentrate revenue will be us$925 x 140000 = S$180mil 50% to Alliance will be gross profit of S$90mil per year. Put a conservative 8x PE = S$720mil market cap. An increase from my previous estimation.
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me
c3_jail Senior	27-Apr-2017 11:44        c3_jail About Contact  Quote this Post!
x 0   x 0  Alert Admin	its time for risktaker get some position if bb throw some :D huatahrr      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:42) Posted: look ok...minor up and down risktaker      ( Date: 27-Apr-2017 11:32) Posted: Looks like gone case T.T why big boy throw......like that how to buy alliance zzz
Useful To Me  Not Useful To Me

                                                         First   < Newer   5981-6000 of 10377   Older>   Last