Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Thabo Mathabatha's avatar

Safe to say that the income statement does not fully reflect the potential of the SA business given the large intangibles (which are amortised). As a result, EBITDA would be a good metric to use. Alternatively net cash flow generation can be used. In FY24, the SA business generated an EBITDA of $25 million. In FY25 performance is expected to be higher owing to increased chrome production (counter-acting price decline), increased PGM sales and margins.

Let's not forget that there's 5.5 kOz of PGMs that will be monetised (not reflected in the financials). Also lets not forget that chrome capacity is 2.1 million tonnes per year vs a guidance of 1.85 milion (so a 14% increase in revenue in FY26 is possible). Big question for management is why are do they want to sell the business? Recent disposal of resources in Zambia will generate $16 million over 12 months. We expect increased cash flow from the SA business given the rise in PGM prices. Given these, the company has sufficient funding options to complete projects in Zambia. In any case, on site leaching will only be scaled after 6 months of demonstrated performance

On the copper business, safe to say that they have failed to demonstrate that they scale the business. Roan which was said could do 10,000 tonnes per year in 2021 and 13,000 tonnes per year in 2024 post the front end - assuming 1.5% feed, can only do 4,300 tonnes per year at 1.6% feed. So there's already $100 million sunk into Zambia with minimal returns. Hoping that they can fruitfully use the $90 million from disposing the SA business is wishful thinking

Expand full comment

No posts