So they are expanding Rudolstadt to increase its production, despite the current facilities being in the UK if I remember correctly. That would imply there is some German customer in the front running seat. Also it appears to be a different one than ACC.I think we have disagreed on this point previously, but I think Mark is very prudent at this particular point not to speculate on how large he wants the project to grow by 2030. Privately and at the Board level, I’m sure it is much larger than what he said on the webinar, but the company is treading a delicate tightrope with the Sami people and other activitists to get this mine approved on the basis of its small size/environmental footprint.Finally were able to listen to it yesterday. Not making a point-by-point summary this time, too many other things to do. But there are 3 aspects I want to grab out:
- Talnode-Si is picking up speed. That is very nice to see
- They are using part of the 32M AUD they got from the share offering to expand the production capacity of the EVA plant. So its.. becoming more of a precursor production facility rather than a qualification facility. Lets see how far they can come in terms of Talnode-C tpa.
- Marks ambitions towards 2030-ish seem quite conservative. I was hoping to have him say he wants to expand as much as possible given the current market would do anything for more product. His responds was rather Niska production for sure and maaaaayyyybe something more beyond that. Dude.. thats... way too whimsy.
Exactly my thoughts. Mark does not want to be seen as getting too cocky with predictions. Get the 19,500 first then go from there.
IMO MT very much put his diplomat hat on to answer the question. Nothing to gain but much to lose. Prior cap raise money (dilution that MT tries to avoid) has been used to assess greater resource reserves. No reason to do this if much bigger numbers weren't being eyed off (and likely requested by customers). And MT recently stated that once upon a time numbers were guessed based on customer demand, and that this had now been flipped on its head and it was very much about what the resource can offer.
)
Unfortunately I cannot write here what I think in detail because it can be read by everyone. I agree with the above points and go on to say that it has become a kind of maxim to concentrate fully on this one goal of NS.I agree with all of this. I was also dissatisfied with how muted his description of long-term vision was.
But then I think back to less "managed" statements from Mark in other interviews, his unbridled enthusiasm for the project, and the fact they're still drilling out the resource, and I'm quietly confident they're making plans in the background for going MUCH larger.
I'll even go so far as to throw out a moral obligation argument. We own a resource (and technology) that can significantly contribute to the green energy transition. We have a moral obligation to use it to contribute as much towards that goal as we possibly can.
(And if it makes us shit tons of money along the way we'll then I guess that's ok too
Who is MP?
Niska , Martin Philips or was that question rhetorical in which case I’ll blame my lack of Red Bull this morning
I’m fixated on MT. I was thrown by MP. All sorted.
I would like to add: Their plan against this world-climate-protecting measure is not working. Everything follows as the board plans. That is my assessment. I am therefore calm and now waiting for Talga and ACC to reach a binding agreement soon.
So I just now listened to this and there are some juicy bits in there, but they are hidden behind very careful and guarded language. Check out the first question at 23:50 and listen carefully:
in the SP since this as well … happy weekend everyone