Why would this thing pop on any news? No one in their right mind would buy this stock based on a dividend cut needed to pay debt in this kind of iron ore environment.
This also explains why the increased production results for October and November have not led to an increased PPS. Actual cash generation due to Q4 2014 won't be available until Q1 2015.
What are your reasons you think the posted cash cost doesn't include certain costs. Can you site examples? Do you have any literature to back up your accusation? Unless you can cite past precedent or previous examples these numbers supplied by NAP are correct since the company is liable for any misleading statements.
That poster never includes calculations or cites any relevant news unless it supports his/her position. I don't really understand that line of thinking so I wouldn't respond. Yes your operational expenses and Cash cost are the same I calculations I used.
I think your right. Truth is I really don't know how they calculate EBITDA. So far it is always negative and seems to be declining. Hopefully this changes.
PAL will most likely produce negative results. But the revenue and accounts receivable will reflect the increase in production at the Lac de Iles mine. EBITDA is a trailing/backward looking number and will reflect earnings on the third quarters paltry mineral production.
I think Bell is right but that person is way off in his/her reason. Its about accounts receivable, revenue, and day sales outstanding. Every quarter PAL produces revenue and accounts receivable information. Ever wonder why? I did some sleuthing on the subject and here is what I found. For this conversation lets use revenue as "gross profits" and accounts receivable as the amount of minerals in dollars sold during the quarter. Day sales outstanding represents the average number of days a company takes to collect after a sale is recorded in the accounts receivable. The day sales outstanding can be calculated on a quarterly basis using the following formula:
(Accounts receivable/Revenue) * (365 days/4 quarters)
So given third quarter accounts receivable of $52,536,000 and revenue of $46,400,000 I get a day sales outstanding of 103.317 days. What this tells investors is that NAP waits an average of three months before the company collects on any mineral sales which are stated in the company's accounts receivable. This also rather emphatically implies that PAL's net revenue is backward looking by 3 months or a quarter. See PAL can state revenue or gross account statements of the current quarter but due to the day sales outstanding rate of its accounts receivable being 103 days the company has to wait 3 months before collecting any money on those sales.
So what this tells me is that PAL will produce a wonderful revenue number and the accounts receivable should increase but due to the day sales outstanding rate the company will not produce positive EBITDA until three months after the quarterly revenue number. This is my analysis.
Depreciation only applies to the assets of a company say the mine/mill or interest payments for the loans. Palladium can not be depreciated. If it is how would any company produce a profit?
Putting money to work in this company is risky. There are a lot of better investments than this one. The outcome here is not written in stone beware the challenges this company faces.
The company has underlying value but the stock is very over priced to this value. I think it is a decent buy when that happens. But until then I will be warning anyone on this site of how bad an investment CLF is. I think this is a $4 dollar stock nothing more.
You are right I don't I think Lishe is way too positive on this stock. This person needs to wake up to the macro environmental conditions which CLF is a part of a figure out what a huge risk buying CLF when iron ore pricing is bottoming is. CLF is an iron ore trader. There is no way that they escape a dramatic decline in the commodity price. NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How can a company that owes its creditors some $3.0 billion buy back its own stock? I seriously doubt anybody would make that company a loan in the future.
The buyback was nothing but a manipulative ploy by management to stop the short attack.
At best 50 million tons of steel would mean 100 million tons of iron ore production. So then how does 22 million tons equate to 40% of the market?
Thank you for making my point. Selling 22 million tons of iron ore does not equate to 40% of the US production when the country produces 50 million tons of steel a year.
Actually that is a really good reply. The exact reason I am in this stock. Palladium grades are absolutely fine, the mining of the palladium is profitable, but PAL has gigantic challenges when it comes to mine finance. For some reason the Lac de Iles mine in the past has not been a profitable operation as noted by its constant quarterly losses which seem to be due to depreciation. It almost seems as if the mine operates for the benefit of the miners only. Actually if you look at most Canadian mining operations this is true. But I think the loan made to BAM a financial company put the companies finances ahead of the miners. BAM has a history of making money. They will turn this mine around and it should become hugely profitable. My stake in this company is largely due to BAM and Lac de Iles and not PAL. I think BAM is calling the shots and not Du Toit. I would like to point out the 3rd quarter conference call and the lack of responses from Du Toit as evidence of BAM running the show.