What Molycorp Has NOT Said About Its Future Rare Earth Production (Until Now)

by Gareth Hatch on November 11, 2011 · 31 comments

in News Analysis, Permanent Magnets, Rare Earths

Bookmark and Share Print

Yesterday I listened to a conference call hosted by Molycorp Inc. (NYSE:MCP), to discuss the company’s Q3 2011 financial performance. The call covered the expected ground, going over the financials and milestones that the company achieved in this last period. No surprises there; Mark Smith, the company’s CEO, pointed out the record revenues that the company earned in this period, which of course is great news for Molycorp shareholders.

As the call proceeded, Mr. Smith started to review what he called the company’s “multi-pronged heavy rare-earth strategy” for the mid- and long term. My ears pricked up at this point, to see if he would confirm some important information about the heavy rare earths at Mountain Pass that I had heard about for the first time earlier this week, from someone else at Molycorp. Unfortunately he did not; later in this article I will share with you what I heard earlier in the week anyway, and let you come to your own conclusion.

Mr. Smith described four different parts to the Molycorp's heavy rare-earth plan. These include recycling, increasing the efficient use of heavy rare earths in key applications, and deploying new cracking technologies at Mountain Pass, to enable both bastnaesite and monazite ores to be processed at the facility. In the past, Mr. Smith noted, only bastnaesite was processed, with the monazite present in the ore body going into the tailings basin. Mr. Smith noted that with this capability, the new cracking facility would be capable of processing mineral concentrates from other rare-earth resources as well, and in response to a question from an analyst, named this capability as the most important part of the overall plan.

Mr. Smith also mentioned the recently announced strategy from Molycorp, to look at additional properties known to Molycorp, which contain minerals with significant heavy-rare-earth element (HREE) content. While he gave no further detail on the make-up or location of these projects beyond that which has been previously provided, given his statement about the cracking facility at Mountain Pass, one could reasonably surmise that such deposits are likely to be dominated by monazite, since there is usually very little HREE content in bastnaesite minerals.

Molycorp has consistently stayed “on-message” with its statements that it will be producing 10 rare earths in “commercially significant quantities”, from the Mountain Pass ore body. This was re-iterated once again in the company’s October 2011 presentation, titled “Rare Earth Resurgence: Molycorp’s Plan to Increase Global Diversity in Rare Earths Through Technology Innovation” and available on its Web site. In this presentation the 10 “significant REEs” are listed as lanthanum (La), cerium (Ce), praseodymium (Pr), neodymium (Nd), samarium (Sm), europium (Eu), gadolinium (Gd), terbium (Tb), dysprosium (Dy), and yttrium (Y). I’ve re-ordered the list shown on the Molycorp slide, to reflect ascending atomic number. The slide includes a statement below the list which says that “Molycorp intends to produce all 10 of these rare earth elements commercially”.

Later in the slide deck, in a separate section titled “Project Phoenix Update”, is a chart which shows which rare earths and metals Molycorp plans to produce during Phases 1 & 2 of their new production capabilities. The list includes oxide equivalents of Ce, La, Nd-Pr (together known as didymium), as well as La metal and “other”. The first four items on the list total around 99% of production, if I read the chart right; looking at the REE distribution in the Mountain Pass ore body, that makes sense, since it matches the average content of those items in the ore body.

One might infer from my last two paragraphs above that, although the REEs Sm-Eu-Gd-Tb-Dy-Y are a small proportion of the Mountain Pass ore body, that they will still be processed into finished products in the near future, just like their more dominant Ce-La-Nd-Pr counterparts.

A reasonable inference, but, it turns out, an erroneous one.

I’ve wondered for a long time now, just how Molycorp intended to produce these “other” REEs in “commercially significant quantities”, given the small quantities present in the ore body. Surely it wouldn’t make sense, I thought, to build HREE separation circuits, given the significant costs associated with such a capability, for such a small quantity. I know others have wondered the same thing, how such capabilities could be accounted for in the $781 million budget for Project Phoenix.

Well finally, all appears to have become clear, following some comments that I heard this week from a Molycorp official other than Mr. Smith.  The first comment concerned the fact that the quantities of Dy and other HREEs to be produced from Mountain Pass remain to be determined, in part because there is still work to be done to quantify the distribution and quantity of Dy and the other HREEs present in the Mountain Pass ore body.

The official then mentioned that the separation of MREOs / HREOs (i.e. oxides of Sm-Eu-Gd plus the remaining HREOs) would likely form part of a "Phase 3" for Project Phoenix, and that until then, any MREE / HREE-rich concentrates produced in the new cracking facility, would likely be stored as concentrates, for future disposition. When I asked if the official could confirm that the costs for such a Phase 3 MREE / HREE separation facility, were NOT included in the $781 million budget for Project Phoenix, he indicated that they probably weren't. Therefore, if I understood this official correctly, it appears that Molycorp has no plans at this time, to produce separated MREOs / HREOs at Mountain Pass, during the first two phases of Project Phoenix.

Now technically, to my knowledge Molycorp has never actually explicitly said that they would produce separated MREOs / HREOs as part of the ramp up to 40,000 t of product, but the company’s assertion that it will produce such elements in “commercially significant quantities”, made in the same “breath” as reference to the others that we know are going to be produced, certainly implied otherwise, and obviously could well have given many in the market the wrong impression, if what the aforementioned official said, is accurate...

One other comment on the call yesterday caught my attention, because I believe it is also misleading. This relates to the assertion that the 30,000 t of rare-earth export quota issued by the Chinese authorities for 2011, is actually equivalent to only 21,000 t of REOs, because of the inclusion of ferroalloys on the list of compounds covered by the quotas. This was the same assertion made by Molycorp in a New York Times article at the end of July 2011.

The article stated:

“Everybody seems to be relaxed because the year-on-year number for 2011 versus 2010 is basically the same amount of materials, roughly 30,000 tons of export quotas,” Molycorp Inc. CEO Mark Smith said in an interview. “The discrepancy is created because China continues to add more products that are covered by the quotas, but we never seem to want to take that into account.”

So far, so good.

Doing an apples-to-apples comparison, Smith says, China’s export quota is really closer to around 20,000 tons. Meanwhile, he predicts the global demand to be much higher.

And here’s the problem – that was NOT an “apples-to-apples comparison”. Apples-to-apples would be directly comparing the 20-22,000 t REO equivalent in 2011 with the 22-24,000 t REO equivalent in 2010 that IMCOA and others estimated on the same basis – the difference being accounted for by the inclusion of ferroalloys this year. The same applies to previous years too, of course.

In the original NYT article, the comparison was instead made between the 30,000 t figure for 2010, and the equivalent of a figure of 21,000 t for 2011. The same (in my mind flawed) logic is contained in the summary comments on the conference call yesterday. In the absence of the fuller comparison described above, using this 21,000 t figure in this way is in my mind potentially misleading, and should be discouraged.

Anyway – that’s it for now. Check out the TMR Web site again soon for more comments and perspective on the rare-earths sector.

UPDATE #1 (11/13/11): Since posting the original piece above, we've received unsolicited feedback from recent visitors to the Mountain Pass project, who were apparently told that MREE/HREE-containing concentrates from Phase 1 & 2 processes, would be stockpiled for further processing at some indeterminate point in the future.

Bookmark and Share Print

{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }

1 hackenzac November 11, 2011 at 9:54 pm

Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of a hat. So, they’re not going to be a player in the hreo’s? They said that they were. Good deduction G Man.

2 Gareth Hatch November 11, 2011 at 10:09 pm

@hackenzac: I think it’s more of a case of “not just yet”. And you know what? I don’t really have a problem with that, per se, since they have a high-grade, LREO-rich deposit which has the potential to supply much of the non-Chinese world’s needs for La, Ce, Pr and Nd. There’s nothing wrong with trying to be the best provider of LREOs possible, especially with Molycorp’s first-mover advantage, and worrying about MREO / HREO production later. I just wish they’d been a bit clearer about this all along… and there is of course now the issue of where Molycorp would get Dy from, if they did get into the magnet business, without being able to produce separated MREOs / HREOs ahead of metal production…

3 MaxkilMachina November 11, 2011 at 10:16 pm

Thanks Gareth for this perspective.

Something unusual happened today, 11/11/2011, in the rare-earth stock market. Lynas and Molycorp are the well known big players in the rare-earth industry. As such, there stock performance has become the rare-earth compass pointing up or down for the whole industry. But today, Molycorp tanked and didn’t brink down the rare-earth market.

It seems to me that investors are now differentiating between LREE and HREE mines and knowing that HREE will be the one in tight supply, specially since even China will be a net importer of HREE.

4 Dr Robert Olson November 11, 2011 at 10:22 pm

Yes, …..story to be continued….

In all likelihood, consolidation by first movers Molycorp and Lynas, to build the finishing facilities, and yet to be named “partner companies” is all but certain.

Why would the primary non Chinese REE movers say anything more at this point?

More story to follow….

USA and Australia.

Kind regards,

Dr. Robert Olson

5 blackjack November 11, 2011 at 10:31 pm

nice detective work-

this is what surprised me about Moly’s share price – it was to me a bit like the dot com boom

Some win some loose
it would seem that phase 3 will need a lot of capitol and this will further dilute the share price

China has an absolutely good reason to keep its REE’s as it wants to green its power use by changing all old light bulbs to LED’s
we are talking billions of LEDS each year. The change will drastically lower electric power consumption and gases from coal burning.

India will be doing the same thing sooner than later.

My bet is still on Lynas as they are months away from production and have bot heavy and light REE’s.

IMO the smaller mines in Australia that show loads of HREE’s will possibly supply Lynas as demand increases

Again a good blog and much appreciated.

6 bz1516 November 11, 2011 at 11:02 pm

Monazite was first mentioned in their ipo documents. so this is not a new theme for MCP. While monazite does have more HREE than bastnaesite, it is my understanding that monazite ore typically has only about 5% HREE. Not worth the additional investment imo with all that additional Ce and La.

7 Schmid November 12, 2011 at 2:13 am

Stans Energy has aquired the mine and production facility which supplied the former Soviet Union with 80% of their REE needs, from
facilities in Krygyzstan. This mine contains all 15 REE’s and this
facility has produced 120 different finished products.
Stans has re-focused on early production and has recently announced
2012 production again, by obtaining outsourced concentrates to be processed in the first of their refurbished plants to be ready, which is the
plant that does the final processing. Under the RADAR of most, IMO.

8 taibi mohamed November 12, 2011 at 4:22 am

greeting
I really read this article about rare earth, it is very important subject. and I propose to search other mines of rare earth or innovation of synthetic element as change this earth

9 CedricL November 12, 2011 at 7:37 am

Am I missing something? Could not the apparent contradiction in what Molycorp are saying re prospective HREE production not be explained by their expectation of having “brought into” Molycorp another producer of the relevant HREE’s with more advanced resources than they themselves have or are likely to have?

10 Anon November 12, 2011 at 9:42 am

MaxkilMachina said: “Something unusual happened today, 11/11/2011, in the rare-earth stock market. Lynas and Molycorp are the well known big players in the rare-earth industry. As such, there stock performance has become the rare-earth compass pointing up or down for the whole industry. But today, Molycorp tanked and didn’t brink down the rare-earth market.”

I hope you’re right about this. Molycorp is not a bellweather for the entire REE space. Investors need to educate themselves and understand what’s real, and what’s hype. Molycorp share price is based on a lot of hype, and I don’t believe they will be the biggest player in the end. Lynas and Arafura will win in the end.

11 Milan Arvensis November 12, 2011 at 10:12 am

Dear Gareth,
I have tried to send my comments concerning your article, but your “Submit System” refused it… Sometime the “Submit System” accept message, sometine No!
Dear Gareth – I am not illiterate…

12 David Lowe November 12, 2011 at 10:55 am

Stans Energy will be a major player in the HREE world. They have already announced:

1. They will produce HREE in 2012 from outsourced concentrates,
2. They have $150-200 million worth of unprocessed ore sitting onsite in piles, meaning they will not have to mine the deposit in order to generate that revenue.
3. They have identified a second deposit, after evaluating 300 sites and narrowing them down to 50 and then finally down to one, in which they are interested in order to become one of the world’s premier HREE producers.

Stans Energy already has
1. A processing plant in Kyrgyzstan where 54 employees are currently at work to refurbish. Most REE hopefuls still have to expend $100-300 million in capex to build these.
2. A deposit which in the past has produced 120 different elements, including the key 17 rare earth elements.
3. Plant infrastructure for shipping finished goods, such as a railroad and roads.
4. The key: metallurgy. This is what separates Stans from all other HREE contenders. LREE’s are about deposit size and grade, but HREE’s are about metallurgy, and Stans has it from the historic records of the Russians.
5. Fortune 500 companies and government organizations visiting the site. Strategic partnerships will announced in the coming months.

Just listen to the commentary of the CEO here:
http://www.viddler.com/explore/objectivecapita/videos/203/

And read about the latest corporate update here:
http://www.stockhouse.com/News/CanadianReleasesDetail.aspx?n=8345219

You will realize after doing some due diligence study that Stans will be a major player in the HREE world, and yet they are still undiscovered by institutional investors.

13 optionsgirl November 12, 2011 at 11:54 am

MCP tanked because it missed both top and bottom line estimates yesterday. There is nothing mysterious about this.

Gareth, thanks for the report on the conference call. It appears that MCP is going to grow by acquisition after its build-out, and that makes sense.

14 fran November 12, 2011 at 12:37 pm

obfuscation and continued change in plan emphasis have been the order of MCP’s communication to the public since IPO. could the hidden facts be the reason behind the Japanese exit; with no new suitors or partners have appeared at the doorway of this REE juggerNOT[naught] ?

15 Subtlesledgehammer November 12, 2011 at 1:15 pm

Molycorp has been not mined anything and does not have all the permits in place to mine anything, the exception being the pockets of all the retail investors who have been royally screwed by all the hype and manipulation on the part of the big players in finance and management, IMHO. They, for all intents and purposes, have no heavies. Both Lynas and Moly are presently dead in the water until they work out their permitting issues. The surprise little elephant in the room that everyone here seems to miss? GREAT WESTERN MINERALS. They are permitted for their S.A. mine and will presumably beat Moly and Lynas to market, heavy and lights. AND they are a TRULY vertically integrated company, which is what Moly pretends they will be. IMO, it is Scam City at Mountain Pass… Others that are promising, IMO, are Ucore, Tasman and, yes, Stans. At least that’s the way I see it.

16 Gareth Hatch November 12, 2011 at 2:35 pm

@Dr Robert Olson & @optionsgirl: I agree that consolidation in the industry and acquisitions by major players is a logical next stage for this sector. Molycorp, of course, has already acquired two companies this year.

@blackjack: it remains to be seen what form a “Phase 3″ would take – building facilities, running concentrates through facilities owned by a future acquisition candidate as well as simply selling concentrates “as is” are all options, and there are others as well.

@bz1516: it would be interesting to see more details on the prospective deposits that Molycorp is considering.

@CedricL: it’s certainly a possibility.

@fran: I don’t have an issue with any company changing its plans, in the face of new information, so long as any such changes are clearly communicated.

@Subtlesledgehammer: can’t say that I agree with your perspective here. I’m not aware of any missing permits at Mountain Pass for the expanded Project Phoenix program. I’ve heard some mention of required finalization of permits for the power-generation facility in the past, but have not heard much on that recently. I can’t imagine that there would be too many issues with such a facility. I also disagree that Molycorp is “presently dead in the water” because of “permitting issues” – seems to be full steam ahead with the engineering and build out, and they are of course generating record revenues.

It’s also been my longstanding view that the controversy surrounding Lynas’ LAMP plant in Malaysia, while containing some real issues at its heart that do need to be resolved, has been blown out of proportion by the media.

17 Poncho462 November 12, 2011 at 3:41 pm

Gareth–
It is my understanding that at least one key problem at the moment for MCP is the lack of permit to build the needed natural gas pipeline to fuel the only part of Phoenix one currently under actual construction, which is the electrical generation plant. Careful reading and examination of their website shows one building, identified as that generating plant, under construction. A video, from their “flyover” series shows what they call ” a most favored route” for the needed pipeline. There is no claim that it is under construction. I believe if it were permitted and under construction, they would be showing that information. All other project Phoenix building projects are simply graded earth as of the dates of the pictures, which are fairly recent. They also have a slideshow labeled “mining operations” at the pit, but which show no activities other than a little drilling, and, of course, it is well known that they are not actively mining.

Now, If they have no fuel pipeline permit for their generating plant(nearly built), and they have no construction currently underway for any of the Phoenix project infrastructure, Can you explain how they could possibly complete the 19,000 TPA phase one and begin production by the end of
September 2012, and further complete construction of phase two, another 21,000 TPA capability by Dec. 31 as they claimed in their releases last week. The reason I doubt the possibility of accomplishing these goals within the time claimed, is that I see the Lynas Lamp, which is equivalent to Phoenix phase one alone, occupies 1.3 square kilometers, has taken longer to build already, and is not fully complete yet.

Here is the link to the MCP site. There are several misleading picture descriptions, but it seems to me that careful study of the words and the pictures result in different results of what MCP can possibly accomplish in the timeline they have presented last week.

http://www.molycorp.com/

I realize the constraints you must recognize, Gareth, and I have no wish to put you on the spot, but simply put, do you believe it to be possible that MCP can actually accomplish these new, very ambitious goals they have set for themselves? I will understand if you would not care to reply.

18 Poncho462 November 12, 2011 at 4:05 pm

Well, I reviewed the website again, and they have indeed updated some of their videos from just a few days ago, and they seem to have removed the video of the pipeline route. I did see in the flyover video a line of trucks doing something in the pit, described as mining. Such was not the case just last week when I visited the site.

They seem to have at least started on the cracking unit foundation, but it still seems to me that their flyover video should at least show a site for what will be the worlds largest single site separation plant(40,000 TPA), again, TWICE the size of the LAMP, that they say will be COMPLETE in less than 14 months. The complete Phoenix project, now stated to be in partial production and fully constructed by Dec 2012, will be producing 8 times the tonnage of the current plant they show, presumably it will need to be approximately 8 times the size, and be of greater complexity to produce the 10(or 8?) separated elements they say they will produce. It simply does not seem possible to accomplish this in the timeline they claim it can.

19 chihawk- Paul San Antonio November 12, 2011 at 5:07 pm

Gareth Hatch,
I see your point about the separation plan versus the promises. It is a very good point. I guess my surprise is Moly can talk about HREE sources without drilling or details and we all search for what they mean and their value. Meanwhile Lynas can drill out Duncan and Mt. Weld to prove their contentent AND they can publish the Crown deposit values and analysts ignore this value in their Lynas calculations. It just seems like a double standard without a reason. Below is the Crown values:
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/812815-chihawk/210670-crown-breakdown-for-gareth-hatch

The following link is the announcement on the Duncan information:
http://www.lynascorp.com/content/upload/files/Update_to_Mount_Weld_Rare_Earths_Resource_Statement_CLEAN_060910_883131.pdf

And this following link is the latest Mt. Weld information:
http://www.lynascorp.com/content/upload/files/Announcements/2011/High_Grade_Results_for_Mount_Weld__120911_1019306.pdf

@Poncho462,
I did an insta using the Moly fly over photos that you may find interesting here:
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/812815-chihawk/232586-molycorp-phoenix-drawings-to-photos-progress

In addition I think if you look at the man hours completed and likely needed for a project this size it is hard to see the current Moly view that it is on time and on budget. Look at this set of slides and links to decide for yourself:
http://rareearthfuture.com/2011/11/12/is-molycorp-phoenix-on-time/

20 Gareth Hatch November 12, 2011 at 5:26 pm

@Poncho462: I’m not really in a position to comment on the potential issues that you’ve raised.

21 Gordon Clarke November 12, 2011 at 5:51 pm

Who in North America (presumably Molycorp) has the capacity to produce HREE oxides from ore from where ever? Once these oxides miraculously appear (without radioactive disposal problems associated with their production),who in North America has the facility/capacity to further pricess these oxides into what the whole world seems to want? At about the time Molycorp went public I remember hearing that the Mountain Pass facility was nothing more than a toxic waste dump and that a cleanup before recommencement would be very expensive. California has I think very high polution standards.Now it appears that we have the lost, now rediscovered, tailing mounds hidden under three feet of dirt. Won’t their processing if allowed produce radioacive problems.

22 Toly November 12, 2011 at 6:52 pm

Hi Gareth, was there any mention of Moly actually mining the tailings pit that contains an estimated 10-20 millions tons of tailings from previous operations? This would seem to be a huge resource if they choose to develop it…

From a Seeking Alpha article 4/25/2011;

“… Molycorp currently also has mining claims on what they estimate is the second richest rare earth deposit in North America and it’s a three minute walk or van drive from the open pit at Mountain Pass. It is the tailings pit that contains 10-20 million tons of tailings created by the 50+ year operational history of Mountain Pass. The estimated TREO of the tailings pit is 4-5% with four to five times the HREE/TREO percentage found in the main Mountain Pass ore body.”
and;

“…it was kind of surreal realizing that the richest rare earth deposit in North America was the source of the second richest and that the new Molycorp facilities are literally a two minute walk from it.”

Also;

“The reason no one is talking about this tailings pit which could add an additional ten years of full production to the mine life of Mountain Pass is because it is a non-compliant resource. We asked management why they wouldn’t try to upgrade it to a compliant resource and we were told that if the compliant resource is higher then the property tax bill will go higher. Management indicated their goal is to have a compliant resource to supply 30 years of mine life and based on our calculations they technically do right now before adjusting for Phase II doubling capacity, so the way we see it there is no need to upgrade this tailings pit to being a compliant resource for many years to come.”

Thanks…
Jay

http://seekingalpha.com/article/265291-molycorp-s-project-phoenix-rising-along-with-its-npv

23 Gareth Hatch November 12, 2011 at 11:21 pm

@Gordon Clarke: I am not aware of any commercial facilities that presently exist in North America for the processing of HREE-rich concentrates into separated oxides and other finished goods.

With regard to your other comments concerning Mountain Pass, I can’t say that I’ve come across any evidence that would suggest that there is an issue of the facility being a “toxic waste dump”, despite the rhetoric of certain activists and others. Given the scrutiny of the authorities in California, I find it hard to believe that such issues, if they existed, would not have already been addressed.

@Toly: I don’t recall the issue of taxes being discussed on the call, but you could check the transcript of the call, which is available at Seeking Alpha: http://bit.ly/tSqvxt.

24 Gordon Clarke November 13, 2011 at 12:46 am

That was a bit of a leading question. What is the GWMG/GQD JV going to produce in SA with ore from Steen, titanium tailings and “other sources” (al la Molycorps treminology)? If refined oxides then what is LCM going to do with them. The point of my question was to stir up some interest in GWTI in Troy Michigan. Note the recent appointments and/or reappointments just announced from GWMG. I sure hope the GQD thing goes ahead. Then photocopy that into North America using GWTI.

25 Ausheds November 13, 2011 at 4:10 am

Quality analysis & reporting Gareth. Very much highlights how Moly really does need to get the basics right. Stage 1 up to steady state with something close to the very low production costs they are claiming and reliable offtake agreements for all that Ce & La they are going to produce. If they can get that far perhaps some of their other grand schemes might be worth examining. The market doesn’t seem to be giving them much credibility ATM and that’s not healthy for the RE industry as a whole.

26 Shawn November 13, 2011 at 8:00 am

Very insight analysis. One question – believe Molycorp has been trying to be a major vertical player from mining to products as they purchased some small companies, do they have any commercial capabilities in converting metal oxide to pure metals?

27 Gareth Hatch November 13, 2011 at 10:23 am

@Gordon Clarke: my understanding is that metal making will take place at LCM in the UK, with alloy manufacturing at both the LCM and GWTI facilities.

@Ausheds: I’ve not really seen any red flags pertaining to Molycorp’s ability to produce the Ce, La and Nd-Pr-based products that they say will constitute 99% of their production going forward.

@Shawn: Molycorp’s Mr. Smith specifically mentioned on the conference call, that they established the capability of producing Nd metal at their Sillamae facility in Estonia last month. That facility was already producing other types of rare metals. It’s my understanding that the Molycorp Tolleson facility also produces rare-earth metals, though I am not sure of which specific types.

28 chihawk- Paul San Antonio November 13, 2011 at 10:36 am

I guess my issue with the Moly HREE strategy is the way they separate the key conversations. They talk about having monazite; then they talk about their ability to crack and process monazite; then they talk about storing waste paste on a liner system instead of building a pond. I have my doubts that this fits together.

How much thorium would be in the waste processed from monazite? And are they permitted to turn monazite waste (higher in thorium) into waste paste and allowed to store it on a liner system where erosion (especially from dryness and wind) could easily spread the thorium? I also blame the media and analysts for these “holes” in that Moly is so rarely challenged for such a weak approach they have already become use to half a plan with a lot of nonsense.

And every Q & A is all shops and all questions on numbers with nothing on these holes in the Moly plans. And how does that make sense in a stock with a PE way over 100?

29 Stephan Mayer November 14, 2011 at 11:46 am

Hi,
so what I am understanding is, that except Stans, there is no other HREE separation plant outside China or India, correct? So how long would it take to ramp up western separation plants for HREE? What about companies like Rhodia, ShinEtsu, Avalon or Lynas? Does anybody know of ramp up plannings and timing?
Thanks
Stephan

30 fran November 18, 2011 at 10:47 am

an answer lays in the quantity of shares bought by insiders at $ 31 vs. quanity sold at $ 51. view the financial beliefs of the board of dirctors [ principal owners ] since jan. 2011.

31 Pleasant Pheasant February 13, 2012 at 11:11 am

Regardless of the rhetoric or analysis, if you are talking resources, then compare Mountain Pass with Mt. Weld.
If considering corporate success, then compare California versus Malaysia wrt approving (rubber stamping) environmentally/politically controversial projects.
Lynas has it bagged up and on its way. It will be well into its phase 2 – 22,000 tpa before Moly wakes up for breakfast

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: