Some post CCB PEA thoughts
posted on
Mar 05, 2016 03:51PM
Hydrothermal Graphite Deposit Ammenable for Commercial Graphene Applications
CCB now has 45 days to file their complete PEA on Sedar. This document will need to show how they obtained those numbers. I do look forward to reading that document and also reading how they obtained a figure of $13k USD per ton of high purity graphite. Most of us knew ZEN played it way too safe when they used $7,500 and if CCB can substantiate the $13k USD per ton, that will be great news for ZEN shareholders.
In CCB's case, they had to use a fairly high selling price as they could not get their costs down below $8k. If they had used the same market data that ZEN did, their project would of showed no economical value. It barely has any now using $13k USD per ton since all their resource is inferred.
We all knew that ZEN low balled the PEA. The $7,500 per ton was low and they can certainly produce more that 30k tons per year. The 30k ton per year came from using a market penetration of 7% of a high end market of about 440k tons per year. Now, ZEN's graphite is as good as or better than synthetic and our cost of production is 1 third the cost of synthetic and we are green. With all those advantages, ZEN should be able to penetrate the market by a much bigger margin that 7%. If you only double that to 14% and use the $13k per ton, the NPV jumps to $4.8B or $80 per share. Even if we trade at 10% of NPV, that would still give us $8 per share as a trading price. The IRR would jump to 103%.
However, if everyone new what the real value for ZEN was, there would be a lot more hands out for their share. Probably part of the reason why everything is being kept quiet.
Here is the Excel page showing NPV and IRR, hope it shows up ok:
With those numbers, the Choo Choo will be just fine!!
Technical Parameters | Year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
Average Grade | 3.14% | PRODUCTION | ||||||
Cutoff Grade | 0.60% | Operating days/year | - | 89 | 178 | 266 | 355 | |
Reserve Level at Cutoff | 45,200,000 | Waste (t/day) | - | 6,720 | 6,720 | 6,720 | 6,720 | |
Contained Value | 1,418,000 | Ore (t/day) | - | 6,000 | 6,000 | 6,000 | 6,000 | |
Stripping Ratio | 1.12 | Waste Prestripping | - | 596,400 | 1,192,800 | 1,789,200 | 2,385,600 | |
Ore Production Rate (t/d) | 6,000 | Ore milled | - | 532,500 | 1,065,000 | 1,597,500 | 2,130,000 | |
Mill Recovery | 90% | Ore grade | - | 3.14% | 3.14% | 3.14% | 3.14% | |
Operating days/year | 355 | Mill recovery (%) | - | 90% | 90% | 90% | 90% | |
Mine Life (years) | 20 | Graphite recovered | - | 15,035 | 30,070 | 45,105 | 60,140 | |
Remaining recoverable Graphite | 1,052,441 | 1,037,407 | 1,007,337 | 962,232 | 902,093 | |||
Financial Parameters | REVENUE | |||||||
Current Graphite Price ($/t) | 13,000 | Graphite price | 13,000 | 13,000 | 13,000 | 13,000 | ||
Mine Operating Cost+G&A+Selling ($/t) | 21 | Gross income | - | 195,453,418 | 390,906,836 | 586,360,254 | 781,813,673 | |
Mill Operating Cost ($/t) | 12 | OPERATING COSTS | ||||||
Total Operating Cost ($/t) | 33 | Mine Operating Cost ($/t) | 21 | 21 | 21 | 21 | ||
Mine Capital Cost | 100,000,000 | Total Mining Cost | - | 23,706,900 | 22,365,000 | 71,120,700 | 94,827,600 | |
Mill Capital Cost | 200,000,000 | Mill Operating Cost ($/t) | 12 | 12 | 12 | 12 | ||
Total Capital Cost | 300,000,000 | Total Milling Cost | - | 13,546,800 | 12,780,000 | 19,170,000 | 25,560,000 | |
Working Capital | 25,000,000 | Total Operating Cost | - | 37,253,700 | 35,145,000 | 90,290,700 | 120,387,600 | |
Real Risk-adjusted Discount Rate (%) | 8% | OPERATING MARGIN | ||||||
Operating Margin | 158,199,718 | 355,761,836 | 496,069,554 | 661,426,073 | ||||
CAPITAL INVESTMENT | ||||||||
Mine/Mill Capital | 255,000,000 | 45,000,000 | - | - | - | |||
Working Capital | 21,250,000 | 3,750,000 | - | - | - | |||
Total Capex Cash Flow | 276,250,000 | 48,750,000 | - | - | - | |||
NET CASH FLOW | ||||||||
Net Cash Flow | (276,250,000) | 109,449,718 | 355,761,836 | 496,069,554 | 661,426,073 | |||
NPV @ Discount Rate | 4,788,341,234 | |||||||
IRR | 103% |