TLG Discussion 2022

[Semmel]

Yeah…….maybe but depends on what your employee plus contractor and fixed costs like rents are.

I guess if you slash to the very bone maybe but evaluations would be unavoidable as would qualification costs. You need those to continue

Exploration you could slash

They should have done a bigger raise last November but they didn’t look at the historical time frames of the SC it would seem. TLG should have asked our own lawyers

They swallowed the BS cordial of a 4 month time frame that the SC puts out there

Just like we all did

If you are correct and I f@@king hope you are the shorts are walking into an ambush

I'm not sure we are going to see any explanation. We had 2.38 quarters of cash left. With expenses that don't need to continue. Say we cut back at the beginning of last quarter by about 40%, which leaves 60% expenses. Then we have 2.38/0.6 = 4 quarters of cash in the bank using the new spending value. Of course we need to subtract one quarter as we lived through that, but the outcome would be that we have 3 quarters left in the bank at the end of June. Numbers might differ but there is no guarantee that we see a CR or a statement. At some point we will need to make a CR, but when is not known.

Still, the delays are eating my nerves.

 

[curiousmagpie]

I'm not sure we are going to see any explanation. We had 2.38 quarters of cash left. With expenses that don't need to continue. Say we cut back at the beginning of last quarter by about 40%, which leaves 60% expenses. Then we have 2.38/0.6 = 4 quarters of cash in the bank using the new spending value. Of course we need to subtract one quarter as we lived through that, but the outcome would be that we have 3 quarters left in the bank at the end of June. Numbers might differ but there is no guarantee that we see a CR or a statement. At some point we will need to make a CR, but when is not known.

Still, the delays are eating my nerves.

Definitely possible for them to show over 2 qtrs of cash remaining in the upcoming report.

Need to get Q2 spending under $7m which is likely if exploration and development has been cut as signalled in the webinar. A bit of accounting creativity to get friendly creditors to date some invoices 1 July would also help.

Problem is the market has expected a raise so has priced it in even though they haven't done one yet.

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

With expenses that don't need to continue. Say we cut back at the beginning of last quarter by about 40%, which leaves 60% expenses. Then we have 2.38/0.6 = 4 quarters of cash in the bank using the new spending value. Of course we need to subtract one quarter as we lived through that, but the outcome would be that we have 3 quarters left in the bank at the end of June.

Then I would be inclined to drop the Quarterly announcement as soon as it becomes available not on the last day of the month

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

If you want a good example of how battered our SP is to our "peers" then compare our market cap of $172M to Renascor Resources of $231M.

Renascor have basically no infrastructure, no qualification with OEMs, not even a pilot plant. All they have is a graphite mine site at a grade of one third of Vittangi.

 

[curiousmagpie]

If you want a good example of how battered our SP is to our "peers" then compare our market cap of $172M to Renascor Resources of $231M.

Renascor have basically no infrastructure, no qualification with OEMs, not even a pilot plant. All they have is a graphite mine site at a grade of one third of Vittangi.

RNU had over $110MM cash so current EV around $130MM compared to Talga $160MM

EGR have a mine and a pilot plant and an EV of around $30MM so shows there is potential to fall a lot further!!

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

Then I would be inclined to drop the Quarterly announcement as soon as it becomes available not on the last day of the month

I'm finding this all rather strange................

1) If we were able to let's say cut expenditure right back to $5M to $7M in the last quarter then we would have between $14.38 and $16.38M in the bank as of 30 June...............or 2 or 3 full quarters of expenditure. Then no questions regarding future funding would need to be answered at the bottom of the cash statement.

Now a Cash Statement is not rocket science to put together so I do not understand why, in the light of the possible good news that we have sufficient short term funding, we wouldn't release the Cash Statement this week.

Not next week this week ................just to help put a bit of a floor under the SP by delaying the need for a CR. Given there are different currencies involved and perhaps a bit of data entry 5 business days should be all that is needed to punch out a Consolidated Cash Statement.

Instead we are seeing this ""walking down" of the SP day after day.

2) On the other hand if we have less than 2 quarters left of funding and no sign of a SC decision then why delay the CR and watch day after day the SP fall ?

Like........." Let's get the Capital Raise done ASAP"

Unless........

3) they are aware of an imminent SC decision (which courtesy of our lawyers) there could be......... why else would you delay either of the above ?

But that is just wishful thinking I'd say

Got me puzzled

 

[cosors]

I'm finding this all rather strange................

1) If we were able to let's say cut expenditure right back to $5M to $7M in the last quarter then we would have between $14.38 and $16.38M in the bank as of 30 June...............or 2 or 3 full quarters of expenditure. Then no questions regarding future funding would need to be answered at the bottom of the cash statement.

Now a Cash Statement is not rocket science to put together so I do not understand why, in the light of the possible good news that we have sufficient short term funding, we wouldn't release the Cash Statement this week.

Not next week this week ................just to help put a bit of a floor under the SP by delaying the need for a CR. Given there are different currencies involved and perhaps a bit of data entry 5 business days should be all that is needed to punch out a Consolidated Cash Statement.

Instead we are seeing this ""walking down" of the SP day after day.

2) On the other hand if we have less than 2 quarters left of funding and no sign of a SC decision then why delay the CR and watch day after day the SP fall ?

Like........." Let's get the Capital Raise done ASAP"

Unless........

3) they are aware of an imminent SC decision (which courtesy of our lawyers) there could be......... why else would you delay either of the above ?

But that is just wishful thinking I'd say

Got me puzzled

I hope you're right.
Let's just wait and see what happens. We've all practised in waiting and trained for years.

 

[cosors]

I'm finding this all rather strange................

1) If we were able to let's say cut expenditure right back to $5M to $7M in the last quarter then we would have between $14.38 and $16.38M in the bank as of 30 June...............or 2 or 3 full quarters of expenditure. Then no questions regarding future funding would need to be answered at the bottom of the cash statement.

Now a Cash Statement is not rocket science to put together so I do not understand why, in the light of the possible good news that we have sufficient short term funding, we wouldn't release the Cash Statement this week.

Not next week this week ................just to help put a bit of a floor under the SP by delaying the need for a CR. Given there are different currencies involved and perhaps a bit of data entry 5 business days should be all that is needed to punch out a Consolidated Cash Statement.

Instead we are seeing this ""walking down" of the SP day after day.

2) On the other hand if we have less than 2 quarters left of funding and no sign of a SC decision then why delay the CR and watch day after day the SP fall ?

Like........." Let's get the Capital Raise done ASAP"

Unless........

3) they are aware of an imminent SC decision (which courtesy of our lawyers) there could be......... why else would you delay either of the above ?

But that is just wishful thinking I'd say

Got me puzzled

I am not familiar with these things.
But could another option be that Talga has another commitment up his sleeve that we aren't aware of and is therefore staying calm?
If I understand you correctly, if, that should be in the next report, right?

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

I hope you're right.
Let's just wait and see what happens. We've all practised in waiting and trained for years.

I just don't understand it. I used to do the Consolidated Cash Statement for an ASX miner 4 times the size of TLG with 12 subsidiaries in the early 1990s. We were ready to go to print within 8 business days of end of month so it can't possibly be a delay in completing it.

But there must be a reason and I can't think of any

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

I am not familiar with these things.
But could another option be that Talga has another commitment up his sleeve that we aren't aware of and is therefore staying calm?
If I understand you correctly, if, that should be in the next report, right?

Then if we fall below 2 quarters he'll need to disclose that immediately. But if we are above 2 quarters you might be onto something until next quarter

So Yes.........the next report

 

[WheresTheMonkey]

3) they are aware of an imminent SC decision (which courtesy of our lawyers) there could be......... why else would you delay either of the above ?

But that is just wishful thinking I'd say

Got me puzzled

Anyone recall at the last Webinar 2 May that MT actually stated that they knew the SC has not even looked at our case at that stage. Now that sort of info must be coming from our own lawyers with "contacts" within the SC

OK so if that was the case back on 2 May and presumably our lawyers have the same "contacts" then just perhaps..?????????????????????????

 

[Diogenese]

I am not familiar with these things.
But could another option be that Talga has another commitment up his sleeve that we aren't aware of and is therefore staying calm?
If I understand you correctly, if, that should be in the next report, right?

What's happening with our lithium resource?

https://talgagroup.eu-central-1.lin...ads/2024/06/21063431/20240621SQMTalga_ASX.pdf

Maybe a cut price fire sale?

 

[cosors]

What's happening with our lithium resource?

https://talgagroup.eu-central-1.lin...ads/2024/06/21063431/20240621SQMTalga_ASX.pdf

Maybe a cut price fire sale?

Unfortunately, I can't say anything about that. I can't find anything official from the SGU nor Bergsstaten, for example. But the antis are already talking themselves into a rage and foaming at the mouth. They're all scared of the CRMA and the strategic projects that can be waved through within 27 months.

Until now, I assumed that money would only flow to Talga on a pro rata basis if SQM will have earned money. Talga, on the other hand, doesn't need to spend any money to develop it and doesn't need to worry about anything else. And SQM finances the 19M directly in exploration alone (right to sole fund exploration expenditure). That's how I understood it.

But yesterday I briefly thought about whether Talga and SQM were only negotiating about lithium or whether SQM might be interested in Talga in general.

 

[cosors]

I already briefly mentioned NV's problems. If you are interested in more detail, here are three articles in a row.

https://www.affarsvarlden.se/kommentar/inget-besked-fran-northvolts-revisor-om-vardet-pa-60-miljarder-i-tillgangar

https://www.affarsvarlden.se/kommentar/revisorn-gar-i-god-for-northvolts-bokforing

https://www.affarsvarlden.se/kronika/northvolt-grundaren-harald-mix-2013-billiga-pengar-ar-som-heroin

 

[cosors]

If you are interested in why Kallak or Beowulf and Jokkmokk cannot be compared with Talga's trial, or why the comparison is not accurate:

Beowulf och Jokkmokk Iron ger uppdatering om Gállok-järnmalmsprojektet

Beowulf Mining och dess helägda svenska dotterbolag Jokkmokk Iron Mines AB ("Jokkmokk Iron") har publicerat en uppdatering om Gállok-järnmalmsprojektet. Höjdpunkter Miljötillstånd

www.industrinyheter.se

 

[teilenswert]

Whoop whoop: another quarter without any relevant progress - let's see how Mark tries to keep the shareholders happy. I'm not particularly optimistic that this will contribute to a sustained recovery in the share price, so I've sent a few unmotivated questions to the IR department:

1. What is the rationale for not needing to do a capital raise to 5-year lows in the next few months?
2. Why can't Talga translate the supposedly incredible potential of Talnode-Si or Talnode-E into sales and higher market capitalization?
3. Assuming we reach first production of Talnode-C on January 1, 2027, how long is the full ramp-up phase expected to take?
4. Are all further steps after the approvals of the mine and the anode factory still no-brainers (project-based and bank financing; offtake agreements within the range of the DFS data)?
5. What other permits have already been initiated/obtained to initiate the expansion of production? Is it still realistic to reach production by the 2030s?
6. We've got > 50 people working for Talga at the moment - what stuff are they working on (there seems not much to do or at least investors can't see much progress) and how do you expect the number of employees to develop over the next few years (depending on key milestones)?

In particular, when I listen to the statements in this video, I would also assume that there are lot's of challenges regarding question 4:

 

[cosors]

What's happening with our lithium resource?

https://talgagroup.eu-central-1.lin...ads/2024/06/21063431/20240621SQMTalga_ASX.pdf

Maybe a cut price fire sale?

Maybe from general interest:

Technology, Resource and Mining

I have looked at the location of that lithium tenement and it's again quite far north. Not sure about the border of the reindeer grazing zones, but if it's on their land, don't expect any proceed on this within 5 years. i.e. it's irrelevant for the time being. Quarterly Activities Review For...

thestockexchange.com.au

 

[cosors]

Whoop whoop: another quarter without any relevant progress - let's see how Mark tries to keep the shareholders happy. I'm not particularly optimistic that this will contribute to a sustained recovery in the share price, so I've sent a few unmotivated questions to the IR department:

1. What is the rationale for not needing to do a capital raise to 5-year lows in the next few months?
2. Why can't Talga translate the supposedly incredible potential of Talnode-Si or Talnode-E into sales and higher market capitalization?
3. Assuming we reach first production of Talnode-C on January 1, 2027, how long is the full ramp-up phase expected to take?
4. Are all further steps after the approvals of the mine and the anode factory still no-brainers (project-based and bank financing; offtake agreements within the range of the DFS data)?
5. What other permits have already been initiated/obtained to initiate the expansion of production? Is it still realistic to reach production by the 2030s?
6. We've got > 50 people working for Talga at the moment - what stuff are they working on (there seems not much to do or at least investors can't see much progress) and how do you expect the number of employees to develop over the next few years (depending on key milestones)?

In particular, when I listen to the statements in this video, I would also assume that there are lot's of challenges regarding question 4:

The question really shouldn't be how MT keeps his share holders happy, but absolutely how Sweden wants to deal with investors in their country.
The focus is not MT and not Talga. It is Sweden and more specifically the Social Democrats who are trying to get by in opposition. They are trying to form a line. A tough test for them. We're seeing the consequences right now.
Even their flagship project NV is tottering on a massive scale.
It is Sweden not MT not Talga.
Methinks I would address your questions differently. What is he supposed to tell us that we don't already know about the present issues?

 

[curiousmagpie]

The question really shouldn't be how MT keeps his share holders happy, but absolutely how Sweden wants to deal with investors in their country.
The focus is not MT and not Talga. It is Sweden and more specifically the Social Democrats who are trying to get by in opposition. They are trying to form a line. A tough test for them. We're seeing the consequences right now.
Even their flagship project NV is tottering on a massive scale.
It is Sweden not MT not Talga.
Methinks I would address your questions differently. What is he supposed to tell us that we don't already know about the present issues?

I think teilenswert's questions are perfectly valid and need to be asked. The SC is a challenging situation but it's not acceptable to deflect any and all criticism towards the Swedish authorities. There must be some accountability from the company for the current situation. There are things in their control that they could and should have done differently and it is well within shareholders rights to demand answers.

 

[brewm0re]

I think teilenswert's questions are perfectly valid and need to be asked. The SC is a challenging situation but it's not acceptable to deflect any and all criticism towards the Swedish authorities. There must be some accountability from the company for the current situation. There are things in their control that they could and should have done differently and it is well within shareholders rights to demand answers.

It’s very clear your downramping strategy. Who would sit on a forum thinking the company is terminal and have no vested interest anymore…. It’s like a pyromaniac watching a fire burn. Have you nothing better to get off over.