Media

[curiousmagpie]

everyone still happy with management and only the swedish bureaucracy to blame?

no missteps from the team?

MT wasn't joking when he told you to sell if you want the price to go up any time in the next 5 years was he?

 

[Gvan]

everyone still happy with management and only the swedish bureaucracy to blame?

no missteps from the team?

MT wasn't joking when he told you to sell if you want the price to go up any time in the next 5 years was he?

Is waiting for substantial free money due in the next quarter a misstep? Must they charge ahead with FID before further grant funding? Should they attempt to finance the mine before the ResourceEU picture becomes clear?

The grant they're expecting is $180m AUD, which is equivalent to 450m new shares, roughly 50% dilution, taking the share count to just under 1 billion. I think I’d rather wait a couple more months.

 

[curiousmagpie]

Is waiting for substantial free money due in the next quarter a misstep? Must they charge ahead with FID before further grant funding? Should they attempt to finance the mine before the ResourceEU picture becomes clear?

The grant they're expecting is $180m AUD, which is equivalent to 450m new shares, roughly 50% dilution, taking the share count to just under 1 billion. I think I’d rather wait a couple more months.

is the $180MM grant similar to the first one where it is paid into Talga's account within months? because the €70MM grant did nothing, one would assume because there are too many conditions and it takes too long to access it. people are understandably skeptical that another grant will make the share price go up

when do you think the resourceEU picture becomes clear and how do you rate Talga's chances of being in the first round and receicing money? is the EU going to include Talga when there are still possibilities of year(s) of appeals against the mine?


i do appreciate your responses so thank you

 

[Chieftain02]

Is waiting for substantial free money due in the next quarter a misstep? Must they charge ahead with FID before further grant funding? Should they attempt to finance the mine before the ResourceEU picture becomes clear?

The grant they're expecting is $180m AUD, which is equivalent to 450m new shares, roughly 50% dilution, taking the share count to just under 1 billion. I think I’d rather wait a couple more months.

The grant they are expecting but don't even know when it will be announced, "Talga has applied for a transformative 1.1 billion SEK (~A$180 million) ‘Industrial Leap’ grant from the Swedish Energy Agency (“Industriklivet 2”), with the outcome expected in Q1 CY2026". Then after diluting shareholders some more and delaying this forever project some more, the POTENTIAL grant funding decision is also pushed back a whole quarter. You would think a management team that is just sitting on their asses at the moment destroying shareholder value, would at least know when to expect the grant outcome. Looks like 2026 the year of "harvesting" is another year of delay, dilution and disregard. The quite a lot of commercial progress that Mark said we should expect to see something coming out over the quarter in the public eye? I certainly have not seen anything, just a new set of fancy slides that pushed back the project even further. Every broker in Australia knows Talga is a company of inaction, just look at the level of institutional ownership and the share price. Hardly screams EUs flagship anode project.

 

[Gvan]

is the $180MM grant similar to the first one where it is paid into Talga's account within months? because the €70MM grant did nothing, one would assume because there are too many conditions and it takes too long to access it. people are understandably skeptical that another grant will make the share price go up

when do you think the resourceEU picture becomes clear and how do you rate Talga's chances of being in the first round and receicing money? is the EU going to include Talga when there are still possibilities of year(s) of appeals against the mine?


i do appreciate your responses so thank you

The $180m grant will come from the Industrial Leap program, which is the same program as the previous small grant. This suggests the company could receive funds relatively promptly, though in practice it may not make much difference if FID is planned for midway next year after engineering completes.

I wouldn't say the €70m grant is doing nothing. It’s fully approved for the refinery build, and the company will draw down on it once the remainder of the refinery’s financing is in place. Your concerns about the Innovation Fund aren’t unfounded: the main complexity comes from the grant application process itself. I saw that recent news reports indicate up to 3,000 hours of work can be involved in preparing the application. However, once the grant is approved, continued funding only requires milestone reporting.

The ResourceEU picture will become clearer over the next 12 months, when 25 out of 60 strategic projects are expected to be selected and €3b allocated. The EU clearly recognises Talga’s importance, looking back at the Innovation Fund, fewer than 20% of applications are successful.

I believe Talga’s chances of receiving further ResourceEU financing are high. Graphite anode production is a top priority for the EU, probably only behind rare earths. Talga is already engaged with the defence sector, and geopolitical tensions make securing strategic materials increasingly important. It would be illogical to fund the refinery but not the high-grade resource that fuels it. Within the EU, there are very few advanced anode projects and Talga is clearly among the leading ones.

Regarding permitting: if the EU were to take an ultra-cautious approach and avoid projects with possible appeals, most strategic projects would be ruled out. Talga’s stage 1 permitting is effectively complete: land allocation and building permits can be appealed, but compared to other projects, it’s largely a done deal. For example, GreenRoc Minerals recently received their exploitation concession but still requires environmental permits... by that logic, they wouldn’t qualify either. The same can be said about many other strategic projects. They're behind Talga in terms of permitting.

Additionally, like the refinery, ResourceEU funds will likely only be drawable once construction starts at the mine site. Talga is aiming for 2029, which essentially mitigates the impact of any remaining appeals.

 

[curiousmagpie]

The $180m grant will come from the Industrial Leap program, which is the same program as the previous small grant. This suggests the company could receive funds relatively promptly, though in practice it may not make much difference if FID is planned for midway next year after engineering completes.

I wouldn't say the €70m grant is doing nothing. It’s fully approved for the refinery build, and the company will draw down on it once the remainder of the refinery’s financing is in place. Your concerns about the Innovation Fund aren’t unfounded: the main complexity comes from the grant application process itself. I saw that recent news reports indicate up to 3,000 hours of work can be involved in preparing the application. However, once the grant is approved, continued funding only requires milestone reporting.

The ResourceEU picture will become clearer over the next 12 months, when 25 out of 60 strategic projects are expected to be selected and €3b allocated. The EU clearly recognises Talga’s importance, looking back at the Innovation Fund, fewer than 20% of applications are successful.

I believe Talga’s chances of receiving further ResourceEU financing are high. Graphite anode production is a top priority for the EU, probably only behind rare earths. Talga is already engaged with the defence sector, and geopolitical tensions make securing strategic materials increasingly important. It would be illogical to fund the refinery but not the high-grade resource that fuels it. Within the EU, there are very few advanced anode projects and Talga is clearly among the leading ones.

Regarding permitting: if the EU were to take an ultra-cautious approach and avoid projects with possible appeals, most strategic projects would be ruled out. Talga’s stage 1 permitting is effectively complete: land allocation and building permits can be appealed, but compared to other projects, it’s largely a done deal. For example, GreenRoc Minerals recently received their exploitation concession but still requires environmental permits... by that logic, they wouldn’t qualify either. The same can be said about many other strategic projects. They're behind Talga in terms of permitting.

Additionally, like the refinery, ResourceEU funds will likely only be drawable once construction starts at the mine site. Talga is aiming for 2029, which essentially mitigates the impact of any remaining appeals.

thanks for the detail response as always. yes it's a good point about the permitting status of all other projects, it seems nothing in the EU goes ahead without objection.

are you expecting 2029 for start of construction of the mine?
and what in your opinion is the range of how much resourceEU funding would be available to Talga, and is there potential for the EU to pre-pay for strategic stockpiling of offtakes

 

[Gvan]

The grant they are expecting but don't even know when it will be announced, "Talga has applied for a transformative 1.1 billion SEK (~A$180 million) ‘Industrial Leap’ grant from the Swedish Energy Agency (“Industriklivet 2”), with the outcome expected in Q1 CY2026". Then after diluting shareholders some more and delaying this forever project some more, the POTENTIAL grant funding decision is also pushed back a whole quarter. You would think a management team that is just sitting on their asses at the moment destroying shareholder value, would at least know when to expect the grant outcome. Looks like 2026 the year of "harvesting" is another year of delay, dilution and disregard. The quite a lot of commercial progress that Mark said we should expect to see something coming out over the quarter in the public eye? I certainly have not seen anything, just a new set of fancy slides that pushed back the project even further. Every broker in Australia knows Talga is a company of inaction, just look at the level of institutional ownership and the share price. Hardly screams EUs flagship anode project.

View attachment 93705 View attachment 93704

That's just how the Swedish system works. Very rarely are their timelines set in stone.

From the same presentation you're quoting:

Industriklivet (Industrial Leap) Grant 2: €100m
Proposed to fund first 5,000 tpa anode production line and infrastructure, significantly reducing incremental funding requirements for ramp-up to 24,5000tpa
DECISION DUE Q1 2026

It may be that it is announced in Q1 (previous announcement said Feb-March), but only officially approved in Q2, which matches the previous small grant from the same program (about a month between announcement and actually receiving the funds).

What would you prefer the company do in this situation? Go ahead with FID before exploring substantial grant options that they are likely to receive? You mention dilution and destroying shareholder value, but how exactly would that workout?

 

[Gvan]

thanks for the detail response as always. yes it's a good point about the permitting status of all other projects, it seems nothing in the EU goes ahead without objection.

are you expecting 2029 for start of construction of the mine?
and what in your opinion is the range of how much resourceEU funding would be available to Talga, and is there potential for the EU to pre-pay for strategic stockpiling of offtakes

Talga have gone with a modular approach, utilising their already available feedstock/ability to use recycled graphite and are only aiming for the mine to be operational by 2029 at the earliest. You can see their timeline has become more clear in their recent presentation. Sweden is slow, but that’s more than enough time for all appeals to have run their course, while still allowing construction time etc.

As an example, pre-CRMA selection, initial permit approval to final Supreme Court dismissal of all appeals: 1 year, 6 months, 25 days. I highly doubt any appeals against the building permit and land allocation will last anywhere near this, especially after strategic selection.

From DI: “Talga’s ambition is to open the Vittangi mine about a year after the factory, but this may take longer because the company can also rely on recycled graphite, partly from Northvolt’s closed recycling plant, Revolt.”

I believe this could change drastically depending on demand (keep an eye on local content requirements, January 28 next year).

I’d be heavily speculating to answer your last two questions. The mine’s Capex is within the scale of what a single project could attract under ResourceEU, though it would likely be combined with strategic partner investment.