AEV - Avenira Limited

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

they've got bloody uranium in the product. that might give the grass a spurt.
i knew often they got the stuff from fertiliser plants -iraq, but it was a supprise.
dont know what acceptable levelos of contanaments are, but the consultant saying it SHOULD be fine or such to clients leaves some doubt.
at least they r putting out news and making progress, ie sourcing water etc.
did u guys hear the bloomberg report where one advisor said it would be farmers driving lambo's, and wall street, london etc financial centres will go back to where the dumb sons were sent. my guess is too many were sent there in the last few decades.
i guess if it goes bad, food, oil/energy, water(clean and unpoluted/diseased) become key. oh and the arms industry too.

 

[derty]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

I very much doubt if Uranium levels of 10-20ppm in the DSO will be a problem. Granite averages 4-5ppm U and can locally have up to 200ppm U (and people build houses on this stuff and clad buildings in it). When I was at Olympic Dam the limit set by the radiation dept for any specimens taken of site was 300ppm U.

Benificiation will likely see an upgrade in uranium levels, though this is dependant on if the U is situated within the benificiated portion of the rock. It is likely though that the P2O5 and U3O8 are associated and U would beneficiate with the P2O5.

I know with tantalum concentrates U3O8 can be an issue, I'll do some digging and see if I can find out what the limits are for those. I imagine it would be similar for P2O5 ores.

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

MAK are still being pretty bullish on RP staying at these levels and getting Wonarah up. Overly so? Not sure but I suppose they do need to be positive on their own project to get the capex. They'll need $100m plus.

How about these projections they provided in the recent presentation. $600m EBITA in just 3 years and continuing on and their current mc is what? $50m or so. Even if they get half the capex from equity it's still looking pretty cheap on their numbers. Market is obviously not as confident as the MAK director in charge of powerpoint presentations.

 

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

i don't see the aus dollar staying too low against the non asian currencies either. hi interest rates compared to the rest, printing money in europe and america, and economy here ticking over fine.
i guess if he gets the 100mill plus capex then it only depends on costs and phosphate prices, costs which shouldnt be too bad in todays climate of required development and a less stressed workforce and contractors.
i can't see phosphate prices returning to the old low prices either, its obvious the world needs more food and oil/energy sooner than later.
it would be interesting to have an inside knowledge of his moves to get capex.
i guess we will know when the SP starts moving up, then an announcement.

 

[J.B.Nimble]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

There is a degree of covering the bases going on here. You have had a fairly decent expansion of the share register through the options conversion at end of '08 and now with the BON takeover. It will end up around 117 million shares if I have haven't missed anything, and all without too much downside on the sp. Prospects for a decent capital raise from the holders has improved accordingly.

At the same time there has been ample indication of the willingness to flog off Fraser iron. There appears to be some effort going in to dressing this one up for sale.

Somewhere between these two paths there exists the means to raise the capital without excessive reliance on debt markets. The issue as always comes down to RP pricing and whether the pricing of late 2007 onwards is the proverbial flash in the pan or the start of a new higher floor for RP prices. If the pricing they show is correct it is holding up rather better than might have been expected but I would be looking for something to corroborate that...

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Technically looks to have found a base as already pointed out after making successive successive lower lows. Even now, could be argued still making lower highs as seen in the major spikes since the topple over the cliff. Potential here for a higher high perhaps, but don't hold your breath. Will start to look much more positive medium to longer term once those spikes are higher highs. First step will be breaking though this .57 resistance and then the intraday high at .62. Then be more excited.

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Technically, still going sideways, no higher highs of any significance, no news, reason to post.

Except today, it seems BON have accepted the TO offer, which to me is STUPID for MAK. I am really disappointed in this jobs for the boys behind closed doors scam. I see NO value in this for MAK! NADA!!! They ought to be concentrating in gaining shareholder value through their current portfolio than adding crap sand under the water in Africa for the value of the idiots who invested in BON, and themselves.

Rant over.


Bonaparte Diamonds accepts Minemakers bid
April 09, 2009

Article from: Dow Jones Newswires

BONAPARTE Diamond Mines has advised its shareholders accept a $9.1 million scrip takeover offer from Minemakers.

Minemakers is offering one new Minemakers share for every 10 Bonaparte shares held.

In morning trading, shares in Bonaparte were steady at 4.2 cents while Minemakers’ shares were down two cents, or four per cent, at 48 cents.

Marine phosphate mining hopeful Bonaparte said in a statement today that its independent expert, BDO Kendalls, had concluded the offer was fair and reasonable.

It said the merger of Minemakers’ Wonarah rock phosphate project in the Northern Territory and Bonaparte’s marine phosphate project in Namibia would “provide for formation of a larger, geographically diversified phosphate producer”.

Bonaparte suspended its diamond mining and exploration activities in South Africa last month.

Diversified minerals explorer Minemakers is also seeking tin, tungsten, fluorspar and uranium in Tasmania, and iron, nickel and gold in Western Australia.

 

[YOUNG_TRADER]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Considering UCL have the other half of the Nambian Phosphate projects I wonder if MAK have run the ruler over them?

I know BON was a good fit given shared directors and thus they already held a decent size of BON but if anything I think this is why BON went so cheap to MAK

 

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

oh well another report out. i thought the bit about cadnium?(cd) levels being an issue for other suppliers, thus support for mak being interesting. plus requesting bulk samples.
still talk of the spur line, but i guess they r still fishing for financing for this one.....makes far more sense than trucking the stuff.

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

This is like watching grass grow. Hmm, actually, grass gets higher, this just goes sidways. Maybe it's like watching cooch grow then.

Anyways, the quarterly.

Lots of nice adjectives in there like 'robust' 'strongly' 'intensive' 'strong', but within the report I didn't see anything of that nature. More like 'ho hum' 'boring' and 'hurry the f*ck up!'

Interesting that they have appointed 'an independant study manager for the bankable feasability study'. WTF? A study for a study? They serious? The'll start forming committees to form committes soon and they might as well shift into politics.

I notice BON has been seen as fair and reasonable by the 'independant experts'. I bet a couple of them are on the board of that company too.


Anyway, enough fun and games, what was in there? What have we got to look forward to that get the sp climbing up through some of this resistance?

Firstly, aiming to be in production in 12 months. Ambitious. But if it progresses at that rate, the sp should naturally climb leading into production.

Second, all assays are in from Arruwurra and being formed into resource estimate for the DSO potential. If they really do get some decent tonnage DSO, should be very good.

Thirdly, the have a rig looking for water. Golly if they find water out there this will take off!!

Forth, rail study in progress. I hold no hopes that this will be feasable in the short term. It's going to cost a mountain of Capex, which just doesn't exist.

Fifth, RP prices are still above Opex and make it feasable. If commods hit a bottom back there, then we might see an upward swing. If so, game back on.

Sixth, they seem pretty bloody confident of getting the funds to take it to production using the trucking solution. However, the corporate placement will come it at a decent discount I reckon, so watch out for that to attract negative attention.


Bottom is looking rounded, we need to climb out the other side. First step is still breaking 62 c.


:sleeping:

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Uh oh, Takeover for BON from their JV in Namibia. I hope MAK don't up their bid in response, they're throwing away enough money as it is.

 

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

seemed like bit of a punt, plenty of conditions to me and unknowns....
mak must have seen this comming, i'm with the camp that why do they need this dog when so much else on their plate.
maybe mak/bon directors dont want it, just want to convert bon stock to mak stock?

 

[YOUNG_TRADER]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Considering UCL have the other half of the Nambian Phosphate projects I wonder if MAK have run the ruler over them?

I know BON was a good fit given shared directors and thus they already held a decent size of BON but if anything I think this is why BON went so cheap to MAK

Uh oh, Takeover for BON from their JV in Namibia. I hope MAK don't up their bid in response, they're throwing away enough money as it is.

Hmmm never thought it would go this way, reckon MAK should just go after UCL to finish it all off,

I think its wise of MAK to de-risk by having a second project on the back burner but doubt they wanted to get into a battle for BON, be interesting to see how it all pan's out

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Hmmm never thought it would go this way, reckon MAK should just go after UCL to finish it all off,

I think its wise of MAK to de-risk by having a second project on the back burner but doubt they wanted to get into a battle for BON, be interesting to see how it all pan's out

I never really liked BON, LN. Maybe I just don't understand marine phos, but the grades are crap. Where's the beneficiation plant?

 

[YOUNG_TRADER]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Hey kenna

I think the benefication plant is somewhere past King Neptunes Underwater Empire but not as far as Nemo's place

Interesting how UCL is rallying on this news albeit on tiny volume, one of 2 things, either punters thinking MAK may well go after them too or (more likely) UCL running up its SP to make script take over more attractive

 

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

i dont really care about the benefication plant, its getting crap out from underwater which seems damn hard work and not very proven yet(later when resources become rarer, it will become common, like the underwater steamers/grothermal anomalies around the shaky isles).
im not quite sure the grass analogy is so true nowadays, as i learnt recently(a slow learner obviously) in nz paddocks are commonly reseeded from bare now(roundup or post crop), every couple of years and the grass revegetates the paddocks within weeks. it grows sideways i believe.
my point is this aint cheap but well worth it, and fertiliser is drilled in directly at the same time. ie far more intensive production(the grass grows so much quicker).
so if u can afford to do this u ain't going to scrimp on fertilisers.

 

[justiceotp]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

We are heading towards a world food shortage so either they need to find new ways of producing food or they need to use more fertiliser to produce higher crop yields from the existing land they have.

 

[shag]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

i looked at the price of dap in nz, nearly a grand nz a ton. that was the 2008 ravensdown prices, but i doubt its come back much.

 

[Sellnobuy]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

Hi Kennas

Yes, I feel it is very undervalued, I have been following mak for a long time and tend to take all info on-board.

Reasons/risks for the low price other than obvious.

-some people have doubts over transport logistics, however I am confident this is not an issue or transport experts (Bill Gibbins) would not be offering a transport solution at a set price.
-the need for pre-feasibility results, laying out clearly opex. I suspect pre-feas will cover various production models including a super low capex option using contract transport and mining. To give the project more certainty to the broader investment community independent opex estimates definitely will help. Suspect opex will be in the $90-120 range for the low capex fast startup option. This will be fine for the first few year but will need to be reduced though a rail link to tenant creek over the longer term.
-metallurgy-very important and results will be included in pre-feas. Early indication from the work rio did and what AD has said, indicate the rp is suitable to be used to produce fertilizer and has low levels of contaminates. However risk still exists. Metallurgy could well be the reason DSO will not go ahead. They should have a good bit of ore grading over 30% but it still might need sieving/washing to remove minor contaminates. I suspect if they ship any dso it will only be for the first few ship loads while the build the benefication plant.
-Phosphate price-Morrocco have a monopoly on exported rp. They have threatened to produce heaps more rp and crush the price back to $100/t. This has had a significant effect on the share price. Question is do you believe their propaganda? I don't. (will post something on this later if you are interested).
-Share price decline (downtrend), a lot of traders held this when it went 20c to $2+, most have now sold this hasn't help the share price. Mak has attracted a lot of traders(bots etc) who don't appreciate the underling fundamentals, this also hasn't done the share price any favours. Hopefully mak is attracting more long term holders to the register (who have done their research and appreciate what mak has) and next time it goes up it will be a bit slow and sustained.
I keep looking but can't see any reason atm mak won't succeed and be potentially massively profitable. Yes there are risks but atm they don't look significant. Nothing is ever certain though.
Can you let me know where you see risks in mak not succeeding, as I would like to discuss them.
Cheers

I have put my hard earnt into MAK as I believe anything Bill Gibbins has a hand in turns to gold.

If MAK get Bill Gibbins involved and the Tennant Creek facility gets off the ground they will be two huge factors that will get this project up and running IMHO

 

[Sean K]

Re: MAK - Minemakers

:sleeping:

Knock knock MAK share price. Wake uuuup......

Actually, it's forming quite a nice base really and should have a shareholder group now confident in Wonarah and may not bail if we have a nasty turn down in the market. I hope...

I didn't notice that Strachan had been commissioned to write up a report on MAK. Good to get the word out I suppose, but I'm always sus on any paid for reports.

Anyway, he's slapped a $5 valuation on them once in production.

Strachan Corporate calculates that the Wonarah project will be viable at rock phosphate prices above US$110/t and at a base case price of US$160/t, the project has an NPV of A$783 million at a discount rate of 13% pa, or over $5.00 per share for Minemakers on an expanded capital basis, comparing favourably with the company’s current market capitalisation of ~$51 million.

And that's at US$160/t

Sensativites are also mentioned:

$110 $160 $200
EBITDA 2012 $m * $32 $193 $322
NPV @13% pa $37 $783 $1,379
IRR 16% 89% 188%
Value per Share ^ $0.24 $5.07 $8.93

So, at $200/t it's potentially worth $8.93. Thats nice.

Sitting down at a lowly 50c means those getting in here could see a handy return in the coming years. Unless the world does completely implode and/or RP prices drop considerably. I'm still waiting for a higher high to materialise...back to sleep...