CCB vs ZEN truth board Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : CCB vs ZEN truth board

ZEN.V 0.920

-2.1%

1:48 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: cbs12311 who wrote (466)	12/16/2015 6:39:28 PM
From: GMPInvestor	of 12350

Came across this post. Great rebuttal to that bullshitter jabercrockofshits "This article (Seeking Alpha) was filled with misinformation. There was barely a sentence that rang true. Consider: The author is yet another supporter of a flake graphite company. Zenyattas end market, Zenyattas product and Zenyattas graphite are like apples and oranges. They can't be compared and the only table they can be in could possibly include Canada Carbon and small Sri Lankan lump graphite mines. In addition consider the following: 1) Zenyattas overburden removal is a relatively inexpensive part of there capex. It is an invention that has taken root that it is a material cost. 2) In a gross distortion of the facts Zenyatta did not take a overly optimistic view of market prices for there product. The price and market assumptions were authored ultimately by Roscoe Postle engineers with input from other third parties. In fact Zenyatta has visibility to higher prices and pushed Roscoe Postle unsuccessfully. 3) Every other graphite mine in the world is attempting to sell into the low to medium strata of the L-ION battery market. It is as high as they can get in high value graphite applications and they also become very familiar with that market. It is also a large and growing market that is high profile and is used for promotion as the holy grail by virtually every flake graphite company in the table that Zenyatta should have never been included in. Zenyattas graphite will sell into ultra high value battery applications that flake graphite never has or never will be able to. Not so much because of purity constraints but because of certain characteristic deficiencies (numerous) that Zenyatta does not have. The super positive attributes of Zenyattas graphite such as thermal and chemical stability mean that it will leave all graphite companies in that table to fight over the scraps of the low to mid value graphite applications while Zenyatta is unopposed competitively in the high value applications that flake company supporters such as this seeking alpha writer with a different horse in the race could aspire to. As for Zenyattas cost the "direct" capex costs ( far lower than the 411 million they are closer to 250 million) and the ability to improve upon already extremely robust numbers make Zenyatta a BUY against any selling that results from yet another misinformed view from yet another flaker. Finally this is very likely something where all the opportunity lies with the stock price. From what I can tell Roscoe may have elected to model full production of 30K tonnes pushed back many years. In other words if Zenyatta lines up end users for 30K tonnes before year one, which they have visibility to do, then the IRR would instantly move to 50% plus. Cost numbers may include that assumption. If so those numbers have room to move down dramatically. The cost numbers, the NPV and the margins and mine life in the context of all of Roscoes heavy financial padding, contingencies and discounts were still extremely robust."

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next