Deep Yellow Limited | Reptile Project, Namibia | Hybrid Model Investment Case Update: or, FCM 5-Level Valuation Analysis (Strict)

TAC15 & TAC10 are discrete proprietary price-value points at which an acquirer might consider Deep Yellow. PMCV15 & PMCV10 are proprietary price-value point models that are supplementary to Projected Book Value per Share. If there are broad discrepancies between PMCV Variants & Projected Book, it typically signals erroneous bankable data or miscalculations on the part of FCM. In the case of Deep Yellow, the numbers do not reconcile very well, which likely stems from an underestimation of CapEx and/or AISC. Needless to say, Reptile is a Project without a PEA, so many assumptions were made in an effort to complete this valuation series.

Forsys Metals | Norasa Project, Namibia | Hybrid Model Investment Case Update (ex-Premium): or, FCM 5-Level Valuation Analysis (Strict)

TAC15 & TAC10 are discrete proprietary price-value points at which an acquirer might consider Forsys Metals. PMCV15 & PMCV10 are proprietary price-value point models that are supplementary to Projected Book Value per Share. If there are broad discrepancies between PMCV Variants & Projected Book, it typically signals erroneous bankable data or miscalculations on the part of FCM. In the case of Forsys Metals, the numbers reconcile well.

GoviEx and Fission — The Case for Outsized Returns (Idle Jottings)

There are mounting indications that the generally accepted high probability of continued losses in the uranium sector has been priced in. Which is to say, the medium- and long-term expected value for staunch bears is now negative, while the medium- and long-term expected value for long-suffering bulls is now positive, although the curia’s perceived probability of gains remains low.

The bears have been correct for a long time although the frequency of their correctness and magnitude of wins have declined, with a handful of exceptions.

GoviEx and Fission are two examples of names that may enjoy upside returns of a magnitude greater than those of peers, as shorts have been more frequently correct though concomitant returns have been somewhat diminished. This is a tell-tale sign of wanton complacency in the aforementioned names.

I want to own names like these whose returns are potentially a full order of magnitude greater than their peers as a result of outcomes that fly in the face of higher probability, albeit moderately-to-extremely priced-in, outcomes.

$LRTNF : Pure Gold Mining — FCM Independent Stock Valuation Analysis

Base Case = $1,400
Flagship Project = Madsen, Red Lake, Ontario, Canada
Fully Diluted Shares = 289,300,000
Fully Diluted Market Cap (25 March 2019) = U.S. $127,292,000
Resource Base (Probable Reserves: Madsen) = 1 Mozs
Resource Base (Indicated Resource: Madsen+) = 2,060,000 ozs
Head Grade = 9.0 g/t
LOM = 12 Years
Average Annual Production = 90,000 ozs
AISC = U.S. $787/oz
CapEx = U.S. $70,807,804
Capital Intensity = U.S. $71/oz
Cost Structure = 60%

Market Cap Valuation per Probable Resource Ounce = U.S. $127/oz
Market Cap Valuation per Indicated Resource Ounce = U.S. $62/oz

90% and 95% discounts respectively to spot gold. The valuation of Pure Gold’s Resources (Inclusive of Reserves) is still fairly low (U.S. $62/oz). At higher gold prices ($1,400+), considerable appreciation of value is possible.

Share Price Valuation by Resources in the Ground (Indicated) = 0.007 ozs

Were there fewer shares or more ounces, Pure Gold would be valued higher, but keep in mind the spectacular grade of Madsen, as well as the relative unimportance of this metric.

Resource Valuation as a Percentage of Market Cap (Indicated) = 5%

The Market Cap is valued at ~5% of the the value of the resources in the ground. This is low and bodes well for Pure Gold’s Market Cap growth.

Discount to After-Tax NPV @ $1,400 = ~60%
NET Cash Flow (LOM) = U.S. $591,232,196
Future Cash Flow Multiple = 4.6
Future Market Cap Growth = 364%
Projected Market Cap = U.S. $590,172,000

Proprietary Stock Valuations

Projected Book Value per Share = U.S. $2.04/sh.
PMCV15 = U.S. $1.49/sh.
PMCV10 = U.S. $1.00/sh.
TAC (Reserves) = U.S. $985,000,000 U.S. $3.33/sh.
TAC (Indicated) = U.S. $1,819,309,600 U.S. $6.15/sh.
TAC15 (Indicated) = U.S. $272,896,440 or U.S. $0.92/sh.

$PNRL : Paringa Resources TAC 15 Analysis

Low cost, under-the-radar 1/50 US ADR with a tiny free-float could surprise on the upside as coal production ramps up and long-term sales contracts are signed.

PARINGA RESOURCES (1/50 US ADR)

COST TO ACQUIRE = US $0.26/TONNE
COST TO BUILD = US $0.33/TONNE
AISC = US $29.24/TONNE

TOTAL ACQUISITION COST = US $29.83/TONNE

PRICE TAG* = US $599,135,550 OR US $84.74/SHARE

PARINGA RESOURCES (50/1 ASX LISTING)

COST TO ACQUIRE = AUD $0.42/TONNE
COST TO BUILD = AUD $0.47/TONNE
AISC = AUD $41.25

TOTAL ACQUISITION COST = AUD $42.14/TONNE

PRICE TAG* = AUD $846,381,900 OR AUD $2.39/SHARE

*Free-Float Methodology

Powerlifting: Is Volume Training the Enemy?

Age: 41
Height: 5’10”
Weight: 200 lbs (Starting Weight: 165 lbs) ; 210 lbs (28 March)
Status: Drug-free
Duration of training: 8 Months
Supplementation: 20-40,000 IU D3 + 5g Creatine Daily

Present Lifts

Deadlift: 415 lbs; 420 lbs (13 March); 425 lbs (17 March); 430 lbs (21 March); 435 lbs (26 March)
Squat: 375 lbs; 380 lbs (15 March); 385 lbs (19 March); 390 lbs (24 March); 395 lbs (28 March); 405 lbs (2 April); 410 lbs (7 April)
Bench Press: 265 lbs; 280 lbs (7 April)

6 Month Goals

Deadlift: 460 lbs
Squat: 430 lbs
Bench: 285 lbs

Volume may not be everyone’s enemy. It proved to be mine, however.

I have come to believe that drug-free powerlifters must lift differently, with an elevated sense of humility and a commitment to heavy, progressive poundages, core lifts, low reps, brief workouts, rest, realistic goals, and finally, enough calories to support growth.

The drug-free powerlifter will break down faster than his enhanced counterpart; one simply is not able to assimilate protein as efficiently as one who is enhanced. But I don’t subscribe to the belief that the drug-free powerlifter cannot make the same spectacular gains as the enhanced powerlifter. Those gains may simply take longer to achieve.

To the drug-free powerlifter, rest, recovery and a commitment to regular, calorie-dense feedings are all-important.

The drug-free powerlifter must be humble and a commitment to realistic goals will ensure that one’s humility is not prematurely slayed by impatience.

What is a realistic goal?

I think the addition of 2.5-5 lbs to each core lift per week is not only realistic but attainable. Plateaus will come and they must not be met with discouragement; they must be embraced. The plateau isn’t the point at which one’s regimen should be altered, but the point at which each lift is met with additional vigor and patience. Why? The plateau is the point at which one’s body is preparing to grow and potentiate the next landmark lift. It will come. Sooner, probably, than you think.

It is the plateau at which I have witnessed my body grow the fastest. It is also the point at which, especially for the drug-free powerlifter, to reduce sets and reps, while ensuring that maximal effort remains devoted to each core lift.

Why reduce sets and reps?

If your poundages have been increasing, so has the intensity of your lifts. Your body has come under considerably more stress over a shorter period of time than when you first began, when weights were relatively light and neural adaptations came quickly. Reduce the number of warm-up reps at lighter poundages in order to preserve power for maximal lifts at target weights. If you’ve hit your goal for your workout, swallow your pride, quit and re-rack your weights. Go home, eat and rest. Otherwise, you will be making inroads into recovery potential and increase the odds of injury.

How many reps?

The path to one’s one-rep max in any given workout is the sum of several reps at various poundages. It will vary from person to person, but there is unquestionably a point at which that sum is too high to ensure that one is able to perform at one’s best at target weights with excellent form. It’s up to you to determine how many warm-up reps at each weight is too many. In order to ensure that I achieve regular increases in strength at progressive poundages, I pared squat sessions down from between 8-12 reps at each warm-up weight to the following:

5 x 135 lbs
5 x 225 lbs
3 x 315 lbs
3 x 365 lbs
2 x 375 lbs (PR)

If I lifted 370 lbs last week and was able to add 5 lbs this week, I WILL grow stronger. As a drug-free lifter, muscle may not appear immediately, but it WILL come, given adequate rest and caloric intake.

If I were to plateau at 375 lbs for an extended period, for instance, I would make an attempt to break through that plateau by eliminating the set of 3 x 365 in order to preserve power for maximal lifts at target weights. A mere breakthrough of between 2.5-5 lbs following a short plateau is often enough to both psychologically and bodily propel one to one’s next PR. Over time, one finds how much is in one’s personal fuel tank, on average, per session. Sip through reserves during warm-up sets; leave the vast majority of fuel for your maximal lifts then get the hell out of the gym and refuel.

What did my last deadlift workout look like?

5 x 135 lbs
3 x 225 lbs
2 x 315 lbs
1 x 405 lbs
1 x 415 lbs (PR)

On both squat and deadlift day, I also do one of two pressing activities: seated presses with a narrow grip, or landmine presses. Due to surfing injuries 20 years ago, I do not perform traditional bench presses, which is not to say that I won’t develop sufficient strength to eventually return to the bench with a spotter that may assist with liftoff in order to avoid rotator cuff pain. In fact, I am certain this day will soon come.

Why drug-free?

I can’t imagine never knowing of what one is truly capable under one’s own power, backed by Faith. I cannot imagine not knowing where one’s own grit ends and performance enhancement drugs begin. We are capable of dramatically more than we think. Impatience is our worst enemy. To be drug-free is to be intellectually honest. Were we all drug-free powerlifters, global records would unquestionably be a little lower, but damn, we’d certainly know who possessed true genetic mettle.