Scandium, Cobalt, and Water Purification: Clean Teq Holdings,Volume 2, 20182017 was a year of tremendous accomplishment for Clean Teq Holdings in every respect.
We saw remarkable achievements in mine construction, in finance, and in market development, with landmark contracts in every business segment;
We saw a complex business appear as if by magic, including business offices on four continents, and the launch of business website in the water division;
We were informed of superb existing and newly-formed strategic partnerships,
with the likes of Airbus, Peng-Xin Mining, Chinese state and power entities, Chinalco, and Multotec;
We were witness to a major off-take agreement with a leading battery manufacture;
We learned of an astute acquisition of a controlling interest in a VRB business by Mr. Friedland;
We learned of deep and valuable research and development support at prestigious universities and manufacturers;
and we became sure of unseen low-cost manufacturing contacts and alliances.
And oh-by-the-way, we got a listing on the TSX.
The company inspires confidence and optimism. Robert Friedland has a deep long-term strategy, and he knows what he is doing.
I am not sure what is more impressive: His strategic vision, or his managerial talent in executing it.
Clean Teq is a company that is worth following. It is by far my largest position.
There are a lot of companies with good concepts. But Clean Teq has a deep and brilliant strategic concept which is at the heart of major world trends; a revolutionary technology; and a management that executes flawlessly.
**
GOING FORWARD: SUITABLE TOPICS FOR THIS THREAD
1. CLEAN TEQ HOLDINGS, CLEAN TEQ WATER, and their interests, or related companies.
2. Miners and producers of COBALT, VANADIUM, SCANDIUM; also nickel, zinc, graphite, lithium, rare earths, silica, and manganese.
3. WATER PURIFICATION, especially when tied into mineral extraction therefrom.
4. “TECHNO MINERS” and other innovators in mining and material extraction
See notes below on thread and topic overlaps, which are unavoidable.
**
One year ago this week, I wrote an article on Clean Teq Holdings. It was a speculative company, but
one with a visionary and proven leader, dramatic potential in specific, attractive commodities,
innovative methods and IP for mineral extraction, and big ambitions in water purification.
Clean Teq Holdings defied easy categorization, and continues to do so.
One year later, Clean Teq has not disappointed. Clean Teq has exceeded all reasonable expectations.
**
If you need background on Clean Teq, I refer you to the predecessor of this thread: “Scandium, Cobalt,
and Water Purification: Clean Teq Holdings”, where you will also find the guidelines and rules for this
thread; and to the Clean Teq and Clean Teq Water websites, which warrant close examination.
OUR BIAS AND BASIC VIEW
This thread is for those who believe in the coming EV wave, light weighting of transport, and most importantly,
in the importance of energy storage and batteries of all scales;
and also, it is for those who believe that the disruptions caused thereby will be rapid.
Because of this opinion, it follows that the existing viable battery technologies and the materials needed
for them are important. We anticipate rapid change; we subscribe to the Tony Seba “Disruption Scenario”,
that suggests disruptiv changes are occuring faster.
If you disagree with the Disruption Scenario, or the eventual proliferation of EVs,
that is fine; but please do not debate it on this thread. The thread is for those who believe in the future of battery power,
and in the immediate opporunities in commodities related to batteries and energy storage.
We will be able to see in shortly whether we are right or wrong in this belief.
If it takes longer than we think, we will complain about ”being early.”
My perspective is for the next five years. That is “long term”. This is not a trading thread.
Occasionally short-term opportunities are appropriate to call out,
but short-term trading is not the emphasis here.
On the other hand should restrain ourselves from too much attention
to developments and materials for technologies that are likely to take longer than five years to have an impact.
We are looking for investable ideas, not 10 year forecasts on the Future of Civilization.
So let’s keep it down on hydrogen fuel cells and molten salt batteries for a couple of months.
**
NOTES ON THREAD AND TOPIC OVERLAPS
Our assumption is that Li-NCM, VRB’s, and zinc batteries are going to be the main battery formats purchased,
installed or contracted for in the near-term, hence the commodities needed for them are of interest.
New battery technologies are better discussed on the #batteries thread ,
unless they involve a vertical commodity/battery producer.
We are interested in what is going to have an impact in five years.
For example, if you are convinced that Google is about to conquer the world with a molten salt battery,
then come on over here and recommend Morton Salt as a buy-out candidate.
But debate whether molten salt batteries have a future, and when, on the #batteries thread.
News that shows increasing penetration on solar are relevant,
as they confirm the importance of large-scale energy storage.
But we would like to know who is getting the contracts and what type of battery they are using.
There is going to be some unavoidable overlap. Nickel and manganese sources are swing metals,
sometimes they may be better discussed on the Hard Asset thread as base metals.
If you make a post on the wrong thread, don’t worry too much, there are
no fines or jail time. I do it myself all the time and I understand it can be confusing.
You can also use Travis’ new cross-reference gizmo.
Long $CTEQF $CLQ Clean Teq Holdings
This is a discussion topic or guest posting submitted by a Stock Gumshoe reader. The content has not been edited or reviewed by Stock Gumshoe, and any opinions expressed are those of the author alone.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-rio-tinto-copper/rio-tinto-ready-to-splash-out-on-copper-idUSKBN1JP0LB
$SCY Scandium International…no position, no inclination, for discussion
A few things caught my eye on Scandium International, Mostly a bullet about 225 tons of take-off; but I am not persuaded.
Putting it out there to thrash it out because I am becoming more bullish on scandium and looking for something besides CLQ. At this time my second picks would be Platina or AUZ (gag).
SCY Scandium International
Jurisdiction, great, market cap reasonable, deposit OK, capex OK, seems to be a reasonable play; except:
** The strategy is to sell mostly scan-alu master allow. So the 225 ton takeoff has only a very small quantity of scandium in it, and another manufacturing partner who needs to be cut in.
**we have no idea of the margins on scan-alu master alloys.
**the forecasted C1 on the scandium oxide is $557 per KG. This is on sales prices of $2000 per KG. Uncle Bob will kill them. He will be at $1500 KG.
He can toy and torture them to death and make trash out of their PFS, because I believe Uncle Bob will have stupidly low C1 scandium costs. Like under $10 lb.
**Low capex from a May 2016 PFS. So why hasn’t anything happened ?
**Lots of action and noise about LOIs. Letters of intent. “If you build it, maybe someday, we might enter into a firmer agreement. Possibly..” They have a nice collection of these from various manufacturers you have never heard of, maybe subcontractors for Boeing and Airbus…I haven’t checked them out.
********************
The best thing about the SCY Investor Presentation is that they have some great charts about scandium useage. Especially good is a scatter graph with different scandium alloy applications, with the potential market size by application; and another chart showing the schedule of different scan-alu alloy, with how much scandium is in them.
Anyway about the application scatter graph. If it is accurate…oh if only it were accurate…or even in the ball park….
They have different sized cirlces of the useage sectors with forecasted annual useage. The “early adopters” quadrant has useage over 500 tons per year. This is 50x world annual production.
So…passing for now on SCY. Going to revisit Platina. Long Clean Teq.
John Kaiser has been pitching SCY for years…he must have a lot of shares. IMO CLQ will be the key player in making a real SC market. He is just starting to to give CLQ a wee bit of credit. https://twitter.com/kaiserresearch?lang=en
Yes he is halfway objective but still goes off target on a few points.
Just my opinion, he mght be right. But I tend to think I have done more varied research on CLQ than he has.
I am not being critical, he has has contacts and info from the industry and he has experience and writes newsletters for a living.
But he has to cover a lot of different companies. I can take all the time I like on a few of them.
$SCY:
HN.**……reasonable play; except:
The strategy is to sell mostly scan-alu master allow. So the 225 ton takeoff has only a very small quantity of scandium in it, and another manufacturing partner who needs to be cut in.**
I was just looking up the 10K For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012 for EMC, Parent Company, now SCY, and they bought The Technology Store in Nevada due to :
TTS conducts research and development of commercial extractive metallurgical processes. TTS specializes in the development of specialty metals extractive technologies, with emphasis on improving recoveries in the extraction of scandium, tungsten, boron, lithium, titanium, and nickel and a host of other emerging and unusual metals. As a condition of the stock purchase agreement, Willem D. Duyvesteyn, the principal of TTS, was appointed to our board of directors on December 16, 2009. (page10) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1408146/000106299313001460/form10k.htm
Look at that date. 2009. What was going on in OUR minds back then? Certainly wasn’t Scandium…
$SCY no position…there does seem to be a lot of interesting technical capability at SCY. The issue is how they translate this to commercial success. There is a lot of tantalizing smoke, like the Leers of Intent, the deposit, the readiness of the project, and so on.
I could see them making a breakthrough; but their business plan depends on selling the sc-alu master alloy. I have no way of evaluating the profit and margin potential of this product at the moment. This is unlike other spec mining evaluations…for example,
if a gold project can sell X ounces with a cost of Y, I can see or imagine the profit margin. But this is opaque with SCY since their
main stated strategy is to sell finished alloys, for which they need a major counterparty.
I am not necessaruily negative about this strategy, it might be a good one, but I do not have sufficient information to evaluate it.
SCY LOIs: I just checked out Grainger & Worral out of curiosity , because it’s a U.K. engineering common in a sector where I have an interest. High quality castings and component manufacturer. Lots of success at Le Mans this month etc. Will ask them about scandium to see if offtake agreement likely.
https://www.gwcast.com/en/about-us/company-history/
HN : Very interesting comment about the algorithms based on B.B. activity following news announcement. I have noticed exactly that effect in the wild and often illogical gyrations in the sp of VRS following their string of recent announcements
The only thing we can do is have a long-term outlook and position sizes that do not distress us.
More on scandium up-take
I mentioned the scatter graph in the SCY investor presentation. It is a very interesting graph and I recommend that it be looked at by anyone interested i scandium.
The chart has four blocks in a matrix.
The vertical axis represents price sensitvity of the sectors….more sensitive to price, or less sensitive.
The horizontal axis represents the speed of adoption by the sector…earlier adopters, or late adopters.
In this 4-quadrant scheme he locates the various sectors:
Each sector or application is located and a circle of various sizes is dran to represent the potential market use of that sector.
Even if it is only roughly accurate, it is valuable information.
$fyi – Technology Metals Australia Offers Excellent Upside With Strong Near-Term Catalysts
BY Matt Bohlsen @sa About: Australian Vanadium (ATVVF), Includes: LGORF
Summary
Technology Metals Australia has already defined a good size, high grade, vanadium resource in Western Australia.
Valuation is extremely attractive.
Near term catalysts include a PFS in June 2018, followed by potential off-take and funding partners. A possible 2021 vanadium producer.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4184903-technology-metals-australia-offers-excellent-upside-strong-near-term-catalysts?isDirectRoadblock=true
Technology moving fast, Toyota building hydrogen fuel cell factory
http://www.futurecar.com/2305/Toyota-to-Set-Up-Facility-to-Mass-Produce-Hydrogen-Fuel-Cell-Stacks
2 July 2018
Clean TeQ Substantial Shareholder Update
Clean TeQ Holdings Limited (ASX/TSX:CLQ; OTCQX:CTEQF) advises that the Company’s Co-Chairman and largest shareholder, Mr Robert Friedland, has increased his holding in Clean TeQ to 12.91% through the on-market acquisition of 1,385,830 shares at a price of approximately A$0.92 per share.
Excellent news and I’m not surprised.
Long $CTEQF
Madness not to at the current share price!
Yes great news… Thanks for posting. Going off the grid for a few days.
Important…streaming and the bigs in the cobalt
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-08/vale-is-said-to-reach-700-million-deal-to-sell-cobalt-output
Wheaton Precious Metals and Vale sign cobalt streaming deal from Vosiey’s Bay nickel project
Was wondering when cobalt streaming would get some traction
$WPM-Vale cobalt stream
“….Wheaton has agreed to pay an upfront amount $390m to receive an amount of cobalt equal to 42.4% of the Voisey’s Bay mine cobalt production. The deal will be in place until the delivery of 31 million pounds of cobalt and following that, Wheaton will receive 21.2% of cobalt production through the life of mine.”
So $390 million gets 31 million pounds of cobalt, then 21.2% of production after that, for the life of the mine, at a price not disclosed. About $12.60 a pound for the first 31 million pounds.
Quick comp: CLQ expects to produce over 4,000 tons of cobalt a year in the first decade. That is 8,000,000 pounds per year. So a comp quantity to the WPM deal will be produced in 4 years, they will produce 32 million pounds; and Wheaton paid $390 million for 31 million pounds this month.
CLQ cannot do this exactly, because 20% of their production is committed to Easpring. But the scale of the deal and the money it is worth show clearly that CLQ should not have trouble raising the capex for Sunrise.
“So $390 million gets 31 million pounds of cobalt, then 21.2% of production after that, for the life of the mine, at a price not disclosed.”…it was disclosed though, that WPM will pay 22% of the posted reference cobalt price. As I read it, that is a 78% discount. Barring a typo that seems like a great deal for WPM.
Its a great deal without the stream, 1.1B worth of cobalt for 390M, and that’s at todays prices. If that stream is true, you’ve got to be kidding me. They are already paying almost 200% interest before the stream.
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Why on earth are they holding a yard sale….never mind the 21% cherry on top?
I often get the feeling we are listening at keyholes with a transistor radio clamped to our other ear.
Can someone explain this streaming business model to me. Whats in it for the producer It always looks like the deal of last resort. Im obviously not understanding it.
It is a form of mine finance. The streamer/royalty company puts up cash, which the miner needs. The miner guarantees the streamer
X amount of its future production at a specific price.
I like the model, you get metal without mining it. The streamers are basically in the check cashing business; and they have geologists and financial guys who do DD over the deposits and deals better than we can.
Some of the better known streamers are WPM, FNV, GG, SAND, OR, ATUSF.
There are not a lot of them.
They tend to focus on gold and silver but other metals and commodities are
sometimes done, as in the present dewal with WPM and cobalt.
I am long SAND and WPM. SAND is my largest gold position by far. I like all the others, it really depends on your entry point and how much exposure you want in gold and silver.
**
I think that Vale gave the lowball offtake on cobalt because cobalt is not vital to them and they want to give a bashing to the new nickel guys coming on. I see it as a shot across the bow to their would-be nickel competitors who need good cobalt prices to get their projects financed.
A low cobalt benchmark for off-take will hurt new nickel projects like CLQ and AUZ and ARL more than it will hurt Vale. Vale is big in iron ore, copper, and nickel. Cobalt is a by-product although Vale has 15% of world non-DRC cobalt per their own figures. Since it is a by-product, they can price it pretty much wherever they want to [ like CLQ can do with the scandium].
Good deal for WPM, and C27 IMO.
The Vale action is worrysome but they will run out of ammo pretty quick, the deal accounts for 75% of their expected cobalt production starting in 2021.
Sarah, look at Sandstorm Gold or Franco Nevada websites, they are very good and explain things pretty clearly.
The producer/developer/explorer gets cash now. A lot of times the deals are done to raise
money needed before production, without dilution or bank debt.
I believe sarah is talking about the producer, not the financing or streaming company. Some of these deals are hard to believe for myself as well.
For years new mines have been giving their product for their “loan” of “upfront” working capitol. My questioning is how can they support themselves in the future, when they start actual mining, with most of their product being used for the “payoff”. This could also hold the stock price steady for years, as no additional revenue would be coming in.
The unknown (Future) estimate of price v cost could also be their demise. Carefully worded contracts for sure. But they do not need outside financing or dilution of stocks either.
Then there is Force Majeure………
The points you make are valid and there are some miners who philosophically dislike royalty and stream arrangements.
My impression is that the majority of deals are made in very early stages of exploration, discovery, and development. Typically a company with nothing but a license and a big prospect will sell a future royalty or stream to finance drilling and development. No bank would ever lend to them.
The royalty companies are the smartest way to invest in gold. When I started investing into metals, 2 of my first 3 stocks were FNV and RGLD. I bought RGLD at 28, gold was at 1188, 30 months later gold is 1250, and RGLD is 96. FNV I bought at 44, today is 74. You have none of the worries associated with the mining business, their overhead relative to their revenue is amongst the lowest in the whole business universe. I thought gold was going way up, still think it will in the future, but I didn’t expect these kind of results with gold staying flat.
Thanks guys….so its the miners bank of last resort and the streamer is the blue chip stock coz it’s risk is averaged down (so long as their DD is good)
This may explain some of Cleantecs woes. The impression I got from Renby’s (?) analysis was that the market reacted badly to the fundamentals revealed in the BFS. This especially as it had nothing to say about where the money was coming from to build the mine. HN recons RF will easily get a loan (China?) rather than have to yard sale it in a streaming deal or massive offering. Mr Market’s not so sure. Certainly the terms reveal will be pivotal for the SP. My guess is that they will sacrifice cobalt/nickle to secure 100% ownership of their other irons in the fire.
Gr8teful…too small to read. What is the upshot ?
Zoom, zoom, zoom 🙂
Tonnes, grades and notes of Oz Cobalt miners, as of 19Jun18.
COB.asx PFS due in minutes.
Have a wonderful Independence Day and beyond ALL!
#Glencore…. DNC related
http://www.glencore.com/index/media-and-insights/news/Subpoena-from-United-States-Department-of-Justice
Glencore shares plunge over 10pc after receiving subpoena from US DoJ relating to money laundering
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/07/03/markets-stabilise-chinese-stocks-sell-off-ends-germany-swerves/?WT.mc_id=tmgliveapp_androidshare_Aq38W5vZTs1v
If only the US Justice Department would subpoena the DNC, instead of Glencore over practices in the DRC.
##DRC related, not DNC….
Heh heh….why don’t I see these things before hitting post? Honestly, I re read it. A couple more mistakes and I’ll qualify as a journalist!
Heh-heh is right.
Q Anon sez there are 40,000 sealed indictments at the DOJ.
HN MEI ASX very good presentation by Andrew Tunks.
Hot Copper Post: 34134345
17/04/18.
Meteoric Resources
Yay!!!! England’s through…..and on penalties. Thats gotta be a first. Drinks are on me guys
A very good game, and a great win for England.
I thought it was a pretty poor game and England will need to play a lot better to beat Sweden. As ever the English press has already put them in the final based on their performances against thse powerhouses of football:Tunisia,Panama and Colombia. You have to laugh!
Laugh??? Most Brits are peeing themselves. I got odds of 50/1 (50/1!!!) that we wouldnt get to the knockout stages. As for winning the tournament, I wouldnt take 1000/1. Still be happy while the sun shines. Plenty of time to say ‘If only…’
50/1 is/was good, you offering 1000/1?
I’d take 1000 to 1. Long shot maybe but you never just know, that’s if they turn up on the day…. (-:
Btw I picked Trump early on at decent odds.
$FLC:ASX
Increased sales in China Water purification
https://www.fluencecorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/20180704-Jinzi-3-PR-FINAL.pdf
RF has made a further acquisition of CleanTeQ stock.
5 July 2018
Clean TeQ Substantial Shareholder Update
Clean TeQ Holdings Limited (ASX/TSX:CLQ; OTCQX:CTEQF) advises that the Company’s Co-Chairman and largest shareholder, Mr Robert Friedland, has increased his holding in Clean TeQ to 12.98% through the off-market acquisition of 696,178 shares at a price of A$0.80 per share.
An updated statutory disclosure is attached for Mr Friedland.
http://clients3.weblink.com.au/pdf/CLQ/01997024.pdf
He now holds 96,600,896 – fully paid ordinary shares.
He is the smartest guy and best executive I have come across.
And Clean Teq is the most interesting and diversified company, with opportunities right and left.
Barring a catastrophic failure in the technology, I can’t consider betting against him.
I can pass on some of his other exploration and development plays.
But not on Clean Teq.
Re posted from Batteries:
$CECBF
bIG bOUNCE on purchase!!
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/cellcube-energy-storage-systems-closes-120000690.html
$LGORF pops as well…..maybe investors thinking it is in “crosshairs” for a takeover??
sarahh…sarah…Sarah…
just out of curiosity, are youz guyz triplets????
As a guest you have to sign in each time (thus no accumulating Thumbs down) Depending on sleep patterns, youll get Sarah, sarah, Sara, sarahh
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…..
Holy smokes, I missed Cube Technology by 1 day, the day I gave myself for due diligence, they spun off another company, and now flying up, the solace is I was also looking at cobalt blue, yikes, this is getting ridiculous. My Blue Vision was spot on re: timing and price of the commodity, but these stocks one by one getting clobbered mercilessly. My gold stocks now heading for quadruples, but my cobalt plan stalled big time. Looking to get some of my CLQ shares back if the price falls under US$50, if it goes up, thats OK too, I have a normal lot. Less committed to holding everything long term, this lot I have I’ll probably keep, but if I get back in with bigger money, more likely to cash in profit earlier. The biggest change to me in fundamentals, other than double the cost of the mine and therefore debt, is everything feels pushed out longer. I am now more conditioned to delays with this company, any illusions that they were type of company that stays ahead of their deadlines has been lost. Who knows the first year they post a profit, how close they come to production goals, how soon they ramp up to anything close to what we expect. So probably a lot of opportunities to make money elsewhere before this really lights up as it gets closer to production, and as well as I know this company, may play the cycles, while keeping a core lot.
$CECBF
I am ….ASSuming that you are speaking of CLQ?
I have also put off Cell-Cube but it is because of lack of personal funding. I am still interested in their upcoming spin off, so I’ll still be looking for that elusive dollar or two.
And MGX on June 29, set that date for their Dividend of ZincNyx Energy Solutions Shares. Haven’t heard anything yet regarding those.
On another note, I had once held VRB. I sold it a month ago because I just couldn’t find more information about it or it’s partners sales. Trading has been halted, and that guy…what’s his name…something like Friedman….is mentioned. But I am all confused about this company. Probably got rid of a nice profit.
I also sold Cobalt27 for more CLQ. I could buy more now cheaper than I sold for, but there is that pesky money flow situation……
CLQ One of the questions I ask myself, is if scandium and water are not priced in to the stock, how do you explain this? Of course, there are some reasons such as RF involvement, perhaps optimism that their technology actually will be significantly superior, connections to the chinese and financing. But does that warrant these differences in market cap. Lets just say the deposits are similar enough to be called equal at this point.
in australlian $$$
CLQ 563M
AUZ 235M
ARL 83M
This is why I moved some money from CLQ to ARL, one looks like it has sky high upside, the other looks like scary downside. Of course its been this way from the beginning. Comments?
Some time back, I asked if the CLQ MC justified an 7-8 multiple of Ardea., after reviewing my DD & reasons for owning .it. As I added to both positions, I added more to Ardea because I believe that the market will resolve that discrepancy (CLQ is still a larger position). Either way, I believe I/we’ll be rewarded for owning both. However, because my in & out timing/trading has not always been the best, I have remained fully invested in both, adding as funds were available and the price was right (although since last fall, the prices have hardly been much better than now!).
There is another point I’ve been thinking about, related to the unbelievably negative response by the market to the feasibility releases in this sector. If those studies don’t have great economics, what that tells me, is the price of cobalt and nickel are too low. I think the world is going to want that Australian cobalt. If the price has to go up to support its mining, thats what will happen.
Pricing information into a stock only seems to last a day or two these days. Today’s rise in CellCube happened because they sealed the deal, from an announcement almost a year ago, (announced July 18, 2017). which looks like it had a 32% increase that day as well. but quickly returned to familiar surroundings.
I think the market of today only looks at “what have you done for me lately”?
I must discipline myself to buy what I believe and don’t keep questioning myself over Mr. Markets swings.
Sarah…or sarahh, or… maybe sarah said (on June 27, 2018 5:53 pm post) that it is time for us to put up or shut up. Do your DD and live by it. We have quite a way to go until the mine starts producing, and announcements will be just that, more words.
Monkees ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udX6y-FB3vU
Indeed, my friend.
CLQ had 88m cash and 112m net assets as at 31.12.2017., plus they raised more than 150m, they have spent something, so lets say it is 220m, that gives cca 300m valuation of all this – nickel, cobalt, scandium, water business, technology, RF connections, star management team, best technicians and partnerships with Airbus, Chinalco, MLAs etc. Is it overvauled? Dont think so. What are net assets of AUZ and ARL btw?
A brand new precentation to all the CLQ-fans! Enjoy 😉
http://www.sydneyminingclub.org/presentations/2018/july/cleanteq/index.html
CHRIZ–Sydney presentation Very strong, you get to know Riggall a little bit and he does drop some tidbits verbally.
Such as: MLA financing will likely go up to $700-800 million.
Such as: battery recycling on the horizon at Sunrise.
Such as: off-take delays are nothing to worry about, they will get a great deal with a startegic partner or two.
Nothing in the talk contradicts my speculation that a major scandium partner will be brought in, who will bear the bill for a lot of the capex that is in the scandium circuit. The scandium circuit can be isolated as a separate sub-project and funded by parties who have keen interest in scandium, and no interest in nickel and cobalt.
RENBY…as usual I agree with most of your conclusions, with some variation along the way on the logic and opinions on some of the particulars. I enlarged my position at 56 cents US and will do some more on extreme pessimism. The additional positions are segregated, and I intend to swing trade a little with this capital, since my allocation is already dominant. So like you if the price spikes or recovers strongly I may sell around the edges.
COMPANY CREDIBILITY…the delay in the first date for the DFS, and the current delay in the FID, both put a dent in the company credibility. When I look at the likely reasons for these delays, they do not seriously damage my opinion of their reliability concerning public statements. Also the context of RF’s enterprises and track record must be considered.
Company and management credibility is an extremely important factor for me.
It is one reason I pore over every word and nuance from RF’s companies, and yet discount and have skepticism about statements from other companies.
At this point I am satisfied also with the judgement, abilities, and credibility of Sam Riggall and Eric Finlayson, and also with the word of Ben Stockdale and the guys in IR, Bill Trenaman and Richard Glass. This is quite an array of individuals from one company, and it is not a coincidence. RF has a philosophy and the people under him subscribe to it, or they do not work there. Competency, integrity, accuracy, and judgment are required of the top employees at Clean Teq, and the people who speak to the public on behalf of the company.
**
In fact if the management is not competent and highly credible, I am uncomfortable having any position at all, even when the geology is very favorable.
AUZ’s recent incident is illustrative. The MD gave a speech to investors a few weeks ago, in which he asserted that funding his mine was a pre-requisite to giving them 100% take-off. Yet this immensely important fact was not disclosed back in February with the take-off announcement, and mine finance was at the heart of a lot of investor doubt.
Then the company issues a statement that contradicts the statement made by the MD at the London conference.
So. Take your pick: Either the MD is telling falsehoods to investors, or the public announcements of the company are withholding material information.
This is quite different from missing a deadline on a very complex project.
Doug Casey on the 9Ps: “In resource companies, the most important factor by far is PEOPLE. They are more important than all the other factors put together.”
VALUATION…I still have high hopes CLQ could be really revolutionary. I think of some of the “disruptors” in capital intensive businesses…in particular, Uber; where a change in business model created a company in ten years, that has no taxis
on its balance sheet (well, maybe a few), and in ten years does more rides than all the taxi companies in the world combined and is worth billions.
I think CLQ has potential of this order, though we are suffering right now. But a few months ago, I was kicking myself for not owning more, and doubted I would ever see prices this low again. So I think it is time to put my big boy pants on and act according to my convictions. The key is not to get emotionally overwhelmed by the position, because as we see, anything can happen to a stock price short-term.
“AUZ’s recent incident is illustrative. The MD gave a speech to investors a few weeks ago, in which he asserted that funding his mine was a pre-requisite to giving them 100% take-off. Yet this immensely important fact was not disclosed back in February with the take-off announcement, and mine finance was at the heart of a lot of investor doubt.
Then the company issues a statement that contradicts the statement made by the MD at the London conference.
So. Take your pick: Either the MD is telling falsehoods to investors, or the public announcements of the company are withholding material information. ”
Someone else picked up on this, AUZ had to make an announcement wherein AUZ “clarified” the contradiction. Semantic gobbledygook.
There is still doubt about the facts; the easy way is just to say the the MD said something he shouldn’t have. Which is obvious….but whether it is true or false is another matter.
It is a real problem for me when you cannot trust what a top executive has to say, or when you have doubt about what the company says in news releases, or when you think material information is being withheld by the company. This is much different from someone making a mistake, or missing a deadline or a production forecast.
So. Take your pick: Either the MD is telling falsehoods to investors, or the public announcements of the company are withholding material information. ”
Don’t really see it that way, very few shareholders have that incidence as of any real problem. BB’s done it before and got ticked off by the ASX. This is the ASX that turns a blind eye allowing bots manipulation by the big boys to exist.
IMO he’s saying the deal is as good as done but cannot state such yet in an announcement. Fine by me…..
$FLC lp
https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2018-07-05/flc-aspiral-tm-sales-expand-in-hubei-china-with-new-partner
COBALT PRODUCTION
The last few days I have put a little more focus on cobalt production, with an eye towards trying to get a grip on artisanal DRC production and a better understanding of the gross supply/demand/risk factors in cobalt.
Along the way, I have seen strong confirmation of my assertion that the Chinese are moving in like crazy into the DRC, while western investors are shunning the country in panic. This I will touch on in a second post.
Page 7 of the CLQ investor presentation has the data I was after: world cobalt production estimates by mine. I have checked just a little into the ownership of these entities; superficially, but enough to satisfy my limited objectives.
Here is a summary of the figures presented by CLQ, plus some insertions.
Mutanda DRC 24,500 tpa (Glencore)
Tenke Fungarume 16,400 ( China Moly, Lundin)
Katanga 11,000 (Glencore)
Huayou 6,300 (China)
Norilsk 4900 (Russia)
*Voisey’s Bay 4500 (Canada; Vale)
*Clean Teq 4000? (Australia/China start 2021)
*Ambatovy 4500 ? (Madagascar, Sherritt)
*AUZ Sconi 5000? (Aust-Korea)
Rusasti 4600 (China, Jinchuan)
Moa 3600 (Cuba)
Big Hill 3600 (DRC, domiciule UK)
Boss 3300 (China offtake)
Vale 3200 (New Caledonia)
Murrin 2800 (Australia)
Taganito 2800 (Philippines)
Artisanal Mining 20,000 (DRC)
Total listed 125, 000 tons per year
with new sources* 2-3 years out, and old production levels. Sort of a mish-mash, I know. 2017 production is generally asserted to be 100,000 tpa.
Note that cobalt is largely a by-product, thus in most cases supply is not elastic no matter what the price is.
Also, there are three source categories that are mixed up: Location of mine,
who owns it, and the country benefitting from production.
For example, Rusasti is a mine in DRC, operated by a South African company; but that company is a Chinese subsidiary of Jinchuan. For my purposes I am interested in Chinese influence, so a Chinese partnership CLQ is relevant, even though it is an Australian company with an Australian project. Boss ownership is irrelevant because China gets the offtake.
CHINA has positions in
Tenke Fungarume (16,400 tpa),
Huayou (6300 tpa)
CLQ (4000 tpa),
Ruasti (4600 tpa),
Boss (3300 tpa).
There are unknowns in their hidden shares of public companies, and I have not
researched the details on all the listed companies and mines, in particular Taganito
and Moa. There are also gaps in that a number of nickel projects that may have cobalt by-product, like Ramu in PNG; and we do not know how the significant
artisanal numbers benefit Chinese interests.
Also, for some reason Chinese production is missing in published figures from 2017.
Previously China as a country was in second position in world cobalt production. This is significant, and conspicuous by its absence. China did not suddenly stop producing cobalt at the beginning of the EV boom.
SUMMARY. We can see that Chinese interests have over 25% of actual 2017 world cobalt production, even allowing for their partial stakes in Tenke Fungarume (58%) and CLQ (20% equity and 20% take-off…so far).
Since we do not know domestic Chinese production, suddenly gone MIA, and their full ownership of all cobalt sources, and the artisanal supply chain, we are guessing.
But IMO we are starting at 30%. I would not be surprised if Chinese interests controlled 50% of world cobalt production.
They are building their interests aggressively, while masking their keen interest.
Cobalt is a priority for them.
Copper is too, but that is another story.
Surprise, surprise.
I think with the Glencore deal, they already have 50% of world production locked up..
“Note that cobalt is largely a by-product, thus in most cases supply is not elastic no matter what the price is”. I’m not too sure about that, I think that is the old reality. What makes something a primary, and what makes something a by-product. Well the thing that makes the most money is #1, and everything else is a by-product. I think nickel and cobalt are pretty even right now, at present prices. I’d call them co-products. If cobalt price doubles from here, which I feel is not a ridiculous proposition, looking at legs say a 3 year window, I think that creates elasticity, a lot of projects that weren’t economical become economical. But as we know, these projects take time to rev up, [way more time than we wish], so I see somewhere between 2021-2023 another big cobalt run, and premium nickel for sulphate too.
The moderation spiders are out of control, everything I post has been sent there, and I haven’t been a bad boy, nothing to merit detention.
HN: While I applaud the effort you have put into this research, I cant quite work out what point youre trying to make. China clearly aims to be the biggest EV auto maker…..therefore they’ll need a lot of cobalt/nickel/copper and wont much care where it comes from or who’s digs it up. As you say ‘Surprise Surprise’. Re child labour; what we all need to realise is that within the living memory of China’s present movers and shakers, child labour (probably still is) a norm (I imagine many of them carried water/rice to their parents straw hut….and look what that’s done for their economy. Look back to the US in the 20’s or even today in the farm lands. I doubt many farm kids just sit around playing game boy while their dads cut corn and while their mum makes pancakes. Certainly in UK during Victorian times (when UK was at its richest, plundering goodies from every continent on the planet) grubby kids worked long hours in the cotton mills. Child labour is a norm when any country is trying to drag itself out of the primordial economic mud. Why on earth do we find it so abhorrent? I helped my dad service his car, did a paper round and mowed the lawn….theyre some of my warmest memories. Of course there will always be abuses. I remember as a Scout, I did a ‘bob-a-job’ week. Some old trout got me to shovel out her coal locker and whitewash it…….then gave me a bob (=shilling ie 1/20th of a UK £.) ! There will always be abusers, but if society is wise it will single out those people for the polices special attention.
Sarah: the world production and Chinese position in cobalt was emphasized because it has a bearing on what we might expect for cobalt prices and the companies that produce it.
When doing research, it is not good to have a pre-conceived idea of what one will find, and what conclusions one will draw. The research may not be conclusive or prove any particular point. So my point was to share the information, without predicting anything in particular.
The DRC figures need to be looked at, because in cobalt the DRC is the world’s largest supplier, and supplies from DRC will have a major impact on cobalt prices. And one’s opinion on outcomes in DRC cobalt might severely modify one’s position in cobalt-related stocks, or even give one some reasons for understanding price action in cobalt and related stocks.
I do not have a “point” to make on a potential outcomes in cobalt, other than to quantify what is known about the producers in the DRC and elsewhere.
People will have to make their own conclusions, as it relates to cobalt stocks and the future price of cobalt.
**
My research persuaded me of a few things, but also raised a lot of questions I cannot answer.
For one thing, the decisive move into DRC cobalt by China had some definition to it.
We hear of the the “ethical cobalt” issue, but hjow much does this affect likely supply of DRC cobalt ? How much are we talking about ? Which mines ?
Also, having a loose grip on the world and DRC production volume helps me evaluate the importance of news. How important is the addition or subtraction of 1000 metric tonnes ? 4,000 tons ? 10,000 tons ? 50,000 tons ?
**
The Glencore-China Mutanda deal was eyecatching. But it raised an ugly possibility I had not considered before: the deal was only for three years. So one party or the other, or both, did not want to make a commitment longer than that. I felt this was odd. Most off-takes are for 5 years or more, that I have seen.
The possibility that occurs, is that maybe someone thinks there will be enough cobalt coming on-line…in three years. One thinks of the time-lines to production of known projects.
So maybe long-term, cobalt prices will moderate; or maybe, someone thinks they will; and maybe there will be a crunch before then, but maybe the bubble pops in three years. Just thoughts, I have no opinion.
But my recent scrutiny of cobalt has brought me to the following opinions:
1. The Chinese move into DRC is accelerated rather than retarded.
No matter what the headlines are, or maybe even under cover of them,
Chinese direct investment in DRC is enormous. (And while I have not analyzed it, it also appears that a similar situation prevails in copper. )
2. Ditto, South Africa.
3. The risks in the DRC cobalt supplies are greater than I thought.
Even a local disturbance in Katanga could have a major impact on cobalt supply. Of course a civil war could occur and maybe China will not get much DRC cobalt for a while.
But aside from political disaster there are three important factors in the DRC cobalt equation:
–Elimination of artesanal cobalt ore.
–Severe reduction of DRC cobalt, to anyone but China.
–Neutralization of Glencore, politically, financially, and with off-take.
4. Thinking ahead to the impact on the distribution of auto manufacturing: China will have access to more cobalt at better prices.
The others will pay higher prices and get another albatross around their necks on auto costs. The price of cobalt outside the Chinese supply chains
will retard penetration of competing EV automobiles, because they will have a cost disadvantage on cobalt.
China can add fuel to the fire by requiring EVs within China. So the others will be at higher prices while Chinese volume is soaring. I see this as possibly retarding the EV movement from producers who do not have
as much access to cobalt as the China will have.
We can imagine cobalt soaring in this scenario but it might dampen or put a ceiling on cobalt prices instead. The Chinese supplies are mostly out of the supply chain, and this could actually put a limit on EV cobalt demand by other competitors…their volume might shrink and retard the growth of non-Chinese EVs. [ I am not predicting this, but it could happen. An additional glut of cobalt from new mines coming on line in a few could also depress prices, if the Chinese have all they need.
Wheaton Precious Metals , a streamer, got a new shot from Vale in Canada. See point 8 ]
6. LME…I was underwhelmed by the LME, which we thought would be a major factor in cobalt contracts. They may become so but at the present time the volumes are pitiful. When I checked, LME cobalt stocks were only 600-700 tons.
Most cobalt sales are outside of public Western markets. This raises a worrisome point: With small volumes, the LME prices might be subject to manipulation; and from what I have seen, the contract prices for takeoff reference LME prices. So LME needs to build volume, it is not a significant source of supply right now.
7. Since cobalt is a by-product, we can see how slowly new projects contribute to world stocks. There are only two projects that contribute more than 7,000 tpa. A big nickel project that can produce 5,000 tons of cobalt, is a heavyweight.
8. Overall, my research alleviated my concerns about artisanal cobalt coming back on line. IMO, If DRC production remains the same without substantial interruption, there still will not be enough cobalt…current mining project stock prices notwithstanding.
Any real disturbance interrupting production in DRC will have big effects on cobalt supplies…especially in Katanga.
The other potential additions to cobalt supplies outside DRC need to be watched. My current opinion is that demand will far outstrip new supplies. At least, that is what the media says; and research tends to reassure on that issue.
.
Good work, HN.
Remember when most companies openly tried to capture a market by dominance and control of the product?
Working with the figures and thinking about it, the artisanal figures must be included in the output of the majors. It is likely an estimate of the amount of the DRC output that comnes from ORE extracted by the artisanals. Artisanals don’t have smelters, refineries, and export companies.
Obviously we are seeing the result of a long-term acquisition strategy.
There are many aspects to it; but the root cause is the Chinese plan to electrify, become dominant in EVs, and to secure the materials necessary to accomplish those aims.
***
There are some very interesting possible outcomes. First, the Chinese supply chain will have advantages in cost. It seems likely that a substantial
majority of the cobalt that gets out of DRC will go to China, though granted DRC prodiuction is iffy for an number of reasons other than the “ethical cobalt” issue.
So Chinese auto makers will have a relative cost advantage on cobalt because the DRC is cheap.
Not only that, the other buyers will have to bid up the prices on a minority part of the cobalt…the part that is not headed for China. So the others are facing another structural cost disadvantage in the price of their cobalt.
This week’s news on “trade wars” seems to indicate that the US automakers will have the door slammed on them on Chinese production anyway. So chalk one up for cost and market advantages to China in automaking.
I suppose the Chinese will be demonized and evil motives will be ascribed.
I see it as an organized and well-thought out industrial policy, that will necessarily damage competitors. I wish our country had as good a policy.
Our leadership has been pre-occupied with enriching themselves,
while stirring up the population with bogus issues like gender equality, global warming, and non-discrimination.
Spot on hn, all rather sad really. Like ants the Chinese are highly organised making our western species look unintelligent at best. Control the source, control the price and chain.
Scandium with it’s military implications might be even more valuable than cobalt, nickel or vanadium to acquire shortly? Is there much available outside of CLQ’s deposit?
The Chinese are wrapping anything up strategic metal wise for the next 25/50 years while the dumb old USA and the EU/UK etc play slow catch up of yesterday’s men.
The Chinese planning system encourages this forward thinking whereas ours does not being to short term for profit now, example recent CLQ DFS. The recent issues in the DRC are irrelevant regards this plan, in fact it’s a BIG plus as competition is removed.
Are they buying up vanadium supply yet? as cobalt and nickel seem nearly mission accomplished. All these essential materials are for Chinese home consumption firstly and then of course export thereafter after manufacturer into transport etc.
Surely CLQ’s 80% offtake left is heading China’s, maybe part of establishing some reciprocal arrangement advantages as RF could no doubt simply sell it tomorrow.
SS: ‘All these essential materials are for Chinese home consumption firstly…’
Sorry, I think youre wrong. For once Trump got it right when he slapped a % import tariff on China . He said ‘China has rebuilt its economy with American money’ .
My point is, while home consumption will make the populous happy, it doesnt gain their economy a penny. You only earn money by swapping your goods/labour for other countries money. Its exports that are crucial.
A country’s import/export ratio is what determines the health of its economy. China has exported (to America) more than its imported, so its become (US$) cash rich. Normally that would have inflated their currency’s value, so that exports become more expensive, so less would be bought, thereby the playing field would be evened out. But China’s central control makes it immune from the market pricing its currency, so it stays undervalued and super competitive.
On the other hand, America has imported more than its exported, As it cant really devalue its currency to deal with the imbalance (without everyone else equally devaluing), so its funded the cost by running up humongous debts. But cleverly it reduced its interest rate to practically zero. Never the less, the bill is still beyond frightening and one day the chickens will come home. Being more of a businessman than a politician, Mr Trump has spotted the problem, so he’s begun to reel China, Canada and EU’s neck in.
But China is one step ahead of Trumps threat. Its already diversifying by ‘buying’ Africa and selling this new high population continent, all the goodies they desire. But there’s a problem……the Africans dont have any money. No matter my friends, like any good pawn shop, they’ll take something of equal value….natural resources…but at a discount price! That way they will have all the resources they need to make even more of the widgets Africa wants to buy. This is a clever move by China. Slowly they have stepped off the rug that America is threatening to pull from under their feet, so reducing their dependence on America as its prime export market.
I suspect the next chapter will be a flat out fight between China and America for sales territory and market dominance….and China can make stuff a lot cheaper than US. Add to this, with the advent of EV’s (especially in their own back yard), China will have a lot less of its money tied up in petro $, so they’ll begin to put the squeeze on the US to start repaying its humongous debt mountain. Can you sense something tightening round Uncle Sam’s neck?
Very interesting thanks Sarah…..
Of course if the States don’t want to pay then “a story” for the next war unfolds…..tricky times ahead.
Question of who can play bluff poker the best perhaps?
As far as paying off the debt is concerned…yes it will be a poker game. There’s an old saying that if you owe the bank $1000 they’ve got you over a barrel….but if you owe them $10 billion (see Elon Musk) they’re standing at the end of your barrel !
But I see no way the US can stop the Chinese securing the biggest chunk of world trade and dominating the market; how could the US stop Angolans buying cheap Chinese widgets unless it competes on price….and it cant.
IMO we are witnessing regime change.
Sarah…regime change, where ?
PS…long term I do not see any peaceful solution to problems in the US except to admit the currency is way overvalued, either voluntarily of involuntarily.
Inflation will wipe out nominal currency values.
Hopefully it won’t be as bad as it was in Germany in the
1920s. But it is likely to be bad.
Sarah…as I see it the Chinese are acting very intelligently.
They are taking the overvalued dollars they get from us for TVs and fli-flops, and buying undervalued hard assets with those dollars we printed up to pay for our imports.
Then they plan to leap-frog the auto and tansport business by going electric. Why pay for imported oil in US dollars ?
Naturally the situation is not of DJT’s creation; but he has to deal with it, and there are not a lot of good options that can reverse the damage of 50 years of trade, industrial and financial mismanagement on the part of the United States.
HN: I think that’s exactly what I was saying.
Regime change.
Ive never advocated buying gold…I always thought it a useless relic. But I may have to change my opinion. What’s left if the $ evaporates?
Sorry; What I meant by regime change was that the US has been the centre of gravity, the centre of trade, the centre of financial stability, the focus for the worlds direction, the worlds policeman . I think Sauron’s eye has moved East. I think the US establishment have been in denial but they are slowly waking up to the sea change. Trump see’s that the US political system is a mill stone round the changes needed to avoid a crash. He’ s sacking the old guard wholesale and bringing in new blood. But whether he can get his changes past congress and the senate is another question. He needs to be a Churchillian, Thatcher like figure and kick some ass. I just hope he doesnt get assassinated before the ball is rolling.
He is kicking ass but a lot of it is unnoticed, or ignored by the media; some of it has to remain quiet.
But a lot of ass is being kicked. I mean, really a lot.
Not that this will guarantee that Trump succeeds.
He has a lot of powerful interests set against him.
List wise I was referring to – http://www.visualcapitalist.com/35-minerals-critical-security-u-s/
They seem to have the same objectives except China seems well ahead, Africa etc. If China wraps up most of these it won’t leave much for the others. 50% or so is a big chunk especially as they not finished yet….
Trump, tariffs etc is another thing, let’s all hope it doesn’t go to far as it will have a bearing on all sectors including ours.
Cobalt publicity…there are some serious disconnects in media presentation on cobalt demand and supply. Some of the distortions are of emphasis, and some are of omission. Here are my observations:
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: most of the figures are based on three references: country
where the mine is located, who owns it, and where the off-take is going.
This approach tends to mask and obscure the interests of the Chinese, who are being very aggressive in acquiring this type of asset. For example, the Rusasti mine is in the DRC, and controlled by a South African corporate entity Metorex.
However Metorex is a subsidiary of Jinchuan. Thus any analysis that is by mine location or ownership will gloss over the fact that the Chinese control the mine.
Similarly, with Clean Teq: the project is in Australia and the domicile is also.
But we know that Chinese interests have 20% of the company equity via Pengxin, and 20% of the off-take will go to Easpring, is to another Chinese company.
Plus the lead MLA is ICBC, a Chinese state bank, and the company has an alliance with Chinalco, another Chinese state entity; and the owner has a strategic alliance with CITIC, another Chinese state conglomerate.
How you want to measure the degree of Chinese interest in CLQ is not clear-cut. But overall it is clear that the degree of Chinese interest in cobalt is understated and
glossed over, by a variety of reporting distortions and misdirections. The absence of Chinese domestic production in recent 2017 analysis is indicative.
EV FOCUS…the media is completely focussed on the EV revolution and high profile
companies like Tesla. How much of this is just the media printing articles that have appeal, and how much is lack of perspective, and how much is intentional and pre-meditated, I do not know.
But the contrast with the lack of coverage on grid storage is very striking.
The actual events on the ground in grid storage are mind-boggling.
But what we get are articles on Tesla vehicles catching fire.
CHILD LABOR…people in the DRC live and work in hells on earth. It is awful.
But I’m sorry, the recent outcry is another manipulated issue that has hidden motives and agendas. And the issue is sugar-coated and the children are like human shields to justify moves that will hurt artisanals cause artificial dislocations of demand and price. Why the issue is transformed from one of slave labor and artisanal mining, to one of child labor, I do not know. It smacks of the same shift of focus from grid storage to EVs.
There is already plenty of uncertainty on DRC output. Adding hysteria over child labor has the stink of another cynical public distraction that will do no good.
STOCK PRICES on DRC cobalt, there is only one western player in the top big cobalt spots: Glencore, with positions in Mutanda and Katanga Mining.
But wonders why, with all the uncertainty in DRC, that prospects in Australia and Canada cannot get any traction. Maybe the Chinese are too busy buying DRC assets directly.
There’s so much mis-direction in the news we get to read. Try this:
New: Small war going on in nasty child-labour ridden DRC,
Public reaction: Who cares?….serves the blighters right!
Possible real story: The US economy was built on motor car production (as is true of the Germany economy these days) and petro $. China now wants to become the dominant world economy. EV’s are an economic game changer. Cobalt is crucial to EV batteries. China presently controls 80% (?) of the total available cobalt production. But DRC has >120% more slopping around. Hmm, how does China secure its monopoly? I know, pay a few local politicians a few $mil to whack alsorts of punitive taxes on cobalt to make it uneconomic for foreign miners to operate. Then start a local war in DRC to stymie any further production. Pay a few local generals a couple of $mil to place a tame army round the mines so no one else can get at it.
Result? A world shortage with China controlling 80% (?) of all the presently available cobalt…..and plenty more waiting in the wings when they need to open the sluice gates again.
Conclusion: Its actually cheaper to contrive a shortage than dig it up if you can control the supply.
In the DRC it’s easy for the Chinese, , you just kick Glencore to the ground, and you are home free. Or buy up Glencore’s off-take.