Slash, again you make a statement of opinion, yet present it as a fact. I’m not sure why I’m even going to answer you, because you are not a holder / genuine poster here.
But/ you make a lot of fuss over nothing imo and do it over and over again.
If you read the rec list from RPA it is pretty clear most points will be addressed as matter of course. From either RPA themselves (as part of mine design, pit/wall angles, dewatering, mining cost base). Or, from the current drilling program we are undertaking at Lac Knife, where we are looking at both the current resource and exploration targets, as we were advised to do. Then, we have permitting with Terrapex (as dannizen notes to you). This will cover off much of the remaining list: mining lease application and mine closure plans, road construction, mine construction, ore processing and camp installation. As part of the permitting process, Focus will undertake environmental auditing and baseline studies, advanced metallurgical testing, mine tailings and waste rocks characterisation, archaeology and biodiversity studies which will lead to a full environmental and social impact study to be completed by year-end in 2013. Finally, we are advised to carry on negotiating off-takes with potential customers and we are. Clearly, Focus are not looking to flush and are addressing issues that need to be addressed to progress here. Really, what is your issue?
Full BFS though? I personally don’t think so (my opinion) supported by.
- We are addressing issues raised at PEA as matter of course: drilling, RPA, Terrapex.
- Economics are clearly robust.
- Graphite industry quirks, close relationships and internal testing for tailored production may circumvent BFS.
- Management guidance (trust).
So what of Management and their guidance? They (particularly GE) have taken some bashing here recently, holders are frustrated because of the price, so the ‘top man’ gets it. Much of the negative is undeserved imo. Most of the issues people have here are market price related, where FMS has no control, or surrounding milestone timelines. The problem is that much of the input for a NI43 or PEA comes from 3rd parties, fully out of the control of the company. Mgt can only give the best estimate, review progress and amend expectations as required. We all want off-takes asap, but this process is also partially controlled by external 3rd parties, so again the progress will be protracted and subject to moving timelines. There is much though that this BoD have done really well. GE/Team have delivered an excellent resource estimate and PEA (Grade/costs). They have always been ahead of the game on financing, we have always had a decent cash balance since IPO and have had no liquidity issues. Jeff does what a Chairman should do, he buys stock to support the story and to put his money where Gary’s mouth is, so we (the market) can see the faith he has in the team and investment. Finally, communication. This is the most approachable BoD I have dealt with. You contact them and they respond. Gary does talk about and does market the company outside of official NR, which presumably competitors/OSC did not like, but as we have seen his comments have turned out to be TRUE (resource, grade, low costs, off-take negotiations on-going, value added strategy with IREQ etc..).
So for me when GE says he does not believe a BFS will be required I trust in that guidance. Ultimately though, I cannot guarantee to you there will be no BFS. Financing environments change, problems arise, challenges can and do crop up, meaning company strategy has to move with it. Regardless of whether we do, or whether we don’t (the journey), I do believe Focus will mine and sell Graphite (the destination).
Both related NR for you to read and get yourself up to date Slash: