Diamond & Specialty Minerals Summary for April 17, 2017
2017-04-17 21:13 ET - Market Summary
This item is part of Stockwatch's value added news feed and is only available to Stockwatch subscribers.
Here is a sample of this item:
by Will Purcell
The diamond and specialty minerals stocks box score for Monday was a poor 50-82-122. The TSX Venture Exchange slipped four points to 829 while polished diamond prices fell 0.1 per cent. Ken MacNeill and George Read's Saskatchewan diamond explorer, Shore Gold Inc. (SGF), reclaimed one cent to 18 cents on 427,000 shares despite -- no surprise here -- a lack of news.
Dominion Diamond Corp. (DDC), up seven cents to $16.84 on 262,000 shares, says that a prefeasibility study of Fox Deep, another resurrection project at Ekati, will be ready late this year. The company wrapped up open-pit mining at Fox over a year ago, but it has been pondering ways to profitably extract a big diamond resource remaining in the ground. The most likely way to do so would be through underground mining, as Dominion has done elsewhere, but that would depend on the value of the rock deep within Fox as underground mining carries a higher cost. Unfortunately, that seemed uncertain. Although when mining was wrapping up at Fox about 10.5 million carats remained, based on 35.2 million tonnes indicated at 0.28 carat per tonne and another 2.0 million tonnes inferred at 0.35 carat per tonne, the rock value would be worth barely $70 (U.S.) per tonne, compared with over $300 (U.S.) per tonne in Diavik's main pipes, based on Fox's current diamond value.
The remainder is available to Stockwatch subscribers.
© 2018 Canjex Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reader Comments - Comments are open to paying subscribers of Stockwatch and unmoderated,
although libelous remarks, obscene language and impersonations may be deleted.
Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of Stockwatch.
For information regarding Canadian libel law, please view the
University of Ottawa's FAQ regarding Defamation and SLAPPs.
Correction:Vanadiumcorp has not suspended it's preliminary economic assessment (PEA) as alleged by Will Purcell above. This is false information and a misleading statement.
Posted by Vanadiumcorp at 2017-04-18 00:36
What word would you suggest I use, other than "suspended"?
These dictionary definitions for suspend, by the way, do seem apt -- put off, defer, delay; refrain from making or forming (a judgment, opinion, etc.) until a later time.
Now, about those timelines. Last summer (July 14, 2016), Vanadiumcorp said: "PEA completion schedule: Vanadiumcorp is pleased to announce its plans to publicly disclose PEA results and file a concurrent supporting NI 43-101 report 30 to 60 days from the effective date of this news release."
And then there's this, from the MD and A published March 31, 2017: "Economics of the considered VE process technology will be included in the Company’s PEA in Q1 2017." (Hours later, it was Q2.)
Posted by Will Purcell at 2017-04-18 02:23
As recently disclosed, we have successfully developed a new exclusive production flowsheet for maxiumum recovery of all commodities that is 100% green and targets cost reduction of vanadium batteries that have no dedicated supply. Establishing stable supply would allow standardization of the impurity profile that currently makes purification of multisource secondary v supply difficult and cost prohibitive. Delay in releasing our PEA is attributed to this new approach as smelting and roasting are no longer required.
Posted by Vanadiumcorp at 2017-04-19 00:59
So work on the preliminary economic assessment part of the, umm, err, PEA, was suspended while you developed this "exclusive production flowsheet" and dealt with the rest of that verbiage.
Is there a new timeline for the completion of the PEA?
You know, when you miss a seven-month target date by a month or two, no big deal to me -- although one's shareholders usually start to howl. When you miss a one-to-two-month target by seven months, one does tend to characterize the delay as a case of suspended animation.
Why the big delay on what was such a short timeline? Problems crop up? Unforeseen issues? Costs too high? Something else?
Posted by Will Purcell at 2017-04-19 09:13
Good question-- why the long delay on the PEA? Problems come up, costs too high or something else? And also VRB, could you clarify why there is mention of the defamation lawsuit against several people in your audited financials? Do you realize that because the remarks are in the audited financials it makes it appear like the company is somehow involved financially in those personal lawsuits?? Has the company paid any legal fees to your joint lawyer for other people's personal lawsuits? Can you please clarify.
Thank you, WILLpower
Posted by WILLpower at 2017-04-19 15:09
Comments for this item are closed