SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Pastimes : Zenyatta Free Speech Board
ZEN 77.480.0%Nov 21 4:00 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: NuclearCrystals who wrote (14689)1/25/2017 2:20:56 PM
From: RuddyMongoose3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Bills16
Heres30
NLWest

  Read Replies (2) of 22811
 
Message #14689 from NuclearCrystals at 1/25/2017 1:08:34 PM

NLWest, you must be confusing me with Chief's comments about Marble offsetting graphite Opex. I don't recall anyone saying anything about Capex funding being offset by Marble production when the Marble operation has a Capex in itself to get to revenue.

I read PEA's ........... do you? Do you understand the difference between Capex and Opex?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nucie-Bob, it remains to be seen if marble cashflows will be positive and if those cashflows will be sufficient to fund the costs related to the capex of the graphite mining. I assume you believe the entire opex costs for both products will be fully offset by total cashflows generated by the sales of marble and graphite. That is a reasonable assumption but it is yet to be proven. I am of the opinion that net marble cashflows to CCB will be insufficient to fund the graphite capex and that will mean more PPs and more dilution.

Arguing about cost offsets at this time before marble revenues are reported in an audited quarterly financial statement is moot. So I'm not even going there. If marble revenues begin shortly after the end of May per the NR, then marble revenues should be disclosed in the September 30, 2017 financials and we will all know if marble revenues are going to be profitable. I assume the mysterious marble purchaser will cover all costs related to quarrying, transporting, marketing, etc so CCB will not have any upfront fixed costs related to the marble production.

The last unknown is if the mysterious marble buyer has the marketing know how to sell Miller marble profitably especially if 90% on Miller's marble is unsuitable for architectural use and crushed marble is only worth $24/ton.
Hopefully the name of the mysterious marble buyer will be released before marble revenues are scheduled to start so that investors can properly vet the company for DD purposes.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News