Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Pastimes : Zenyatta Free Speech Board -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NuclearCrystals who wrote (14689)	1/25/2017 1:46:34 PM
From: NLWest	3 Recommendations Recommended By Bills16 cbs12311 Heres30 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22811

I have to admit that between you and chieffy and the various stories you have both trotted out, it is hard to remember who wrote what and exactly what was written. However the gist of most of the posts was that there would be very little in capital costs because everything was at the surface and could be removed with little effort. I believe the term "rolling resource" was tossed about with the clear implication that, beyond the initial hole being started, the sale of recovered resource would pay for all costs (capital as well as operating). I believe that there was a local quarry/gravel pit operator who was going to do the work essentially for free in exchange for "waste" material which could be used in his operation. Since he was to be providing all of the equipment he would be the one incurring any capital costs. Both of you have touted "stellar purity" so the clear inference is that there would be no need for upgrading/purification and all associated costs. So there is where my question originates because now you are posting that the company needs financing and I am trying to figure out for what. All the previous stories don't jive with what you are posting now. The answer to your two questions...yes and yes.

To: NuclearCrystals who wrote (14689)	1/25/2017 2:20:56 PM
From: RuddyMongoose	3 Recommendations Recommended By Bills16 Heres30 NLWest Read Replies (2) \| Respond to 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.