This might be my favorite, most fantastical post from BB in over two decades.
For the “haters” out there, I promise to never post here again if a single prediction in his post turns out to be accurate. I challenge folks to find an ESG focused offtaker (claiming to be a fund). Its important to understand that the “international minerals traders” (they are all international by the way, otherwise they wouldn’t have a business) have to use those toxic reagents to refine the concentrate. Sooo, the notion that AUMC is morphing into a green mining play is beyond absurd.
The concept of AUMC putting up a solar array on the mountain to charge the batteries to mechanize the mine is “thought provoking.” They don’t even have access to a grid. What happens in the winter months? How would they afford a solar array? Find another mine using this “ESG strategy.”
The ONLY reason why they are limited to a psuedo ESG friendly gravitational concnetration is because they can’t afford anything more advanced. I’d still like to understand where they are sourcing the water by the way. To make the argument that AUMC is pursuing a green mining strategy is literally proposterous. But, but Maurizio said this and that. I find it a bit ironic that the BB’s of the world reference past PRs and statements by the company (from 5 years ago) to legitimize their points even though none of those prediction offered by the company have ever come to fruition.
This is great entertainment but I can only hope that most of the participants on this board actually understand the insanity of what is being presented.
It might make sense for the company to generate a dollar of cash flow, process of ton of ore, enter into a single commercial agreement with binding terms, etc, etc before entertaining AUMC’s potential to solvce the climate crisis by using “green” explosives in blowing up a mountain.