can someone explain the following to me in suffici
Post# of 22940
Posted On: 08/08/2016 10:39:19 AM
Re: tradingjeff #10943
can someone explain the following to me in sufficient detail (ie - with no uncertainty):
-how does $TPAC has any competitive advantage/standing to be importing lithium (or any other precious metal) into China?
-how does this group fit into $TPAC (who are they, where are they based, how many are in their group) and compliment/work with the core strategy of bearings?
a main draw with bearings in China is being a domestic supplier and being NAVAIR certified which provides credibility (repeatabiliy and reproduceability) across their line of bearings/products produced. with the offsets (either manufactured or raw material produced), this gives them a tremendous competitive advantage (primarily cost) over competitors due to geographical location and inherent quality. how does this apply to importing lithium? further - is this simply a facilitation? do they ever take ownership of the Lithium in any capacity or is this like trading crude contracts? even if it is like a crude contract - why would anyone choose a small, relatively unknown commodity bearing manufacturer to handle raw material of this magnitude and expense? i cant make the connection and the company/IR hasnt expounded sufficiently.
they are very cash poor, seem to have limited production/revenue producing operations right now (though if they are in the middle of a 2-3MM part order - that would/could provide sufficient cash flow until SLAs kick in in earnest), and one generally has to have substantial cash reserves to float a $5MM commodity trade (assuming $10K/metric tonne at 500 tons). they appear to have $10MM locked up on loan agreements but are trying to negotiate better terms for $85MM. where do they get $5MM for a lithium trade of this size when it is only a sample?
i think announcements like this only raise more questions about credibility (let alone scalability) instead of driving investors (new and current) to the company to "find out more." when one does try to find out more - it is dead ends or circular loops pointing back towards reconstruction.
good news is there is a 9.6MM offer on BID at 9. bad news is VNDM is back at 9 after being parked at 20 last two weeks.
please - someone explain how this fits in with the company and is even feasible given their current financial state.
-how does $TPAC has any competitive advantage/standing to be importing lithium (or any other precious metal) into China?
-how does this group fit into $TPAC (who are they, where are they based, how many are in their group) and compliment/work with the core strategy of bearings?
a main draw with bearings in China is being a domestic supplier and being NAVAIR certified which provides credibility (repeatabiliy and reproduceability) across their line of bearings/products produced. with the offsets (either manufactured or raw material produced), this gives them a tremendous competitive advantage (primarily cost) over competitors due to geographical location and inherent quality. how does this apply to importing lithium? further - is this simply a facilitation? do they ever take ownership of the Lithium in any capacity or is this like trading crude contracts? even if it is like a crude contract - why would anyone choose a small, relatively unknown commodity bearing manufacturer to handle raw material of this magnitude and expense? i cant make the connection and the company/IR hasnt expounded sufficiently.
they are very cash poor, seem to have limited production/revenue producing operations right now (though if they are in the middle of a 2-3MM part order - that would/could provide sufficient cash flow until SLAs kick in in earnest), and one generally has to have substantial cash reserves to float a $5MM commodity trade (assuming $10K/metric tonne at 500 tons). they appear to have $10MM locked up on loan agreements but are trying to negotiate better terms for $85MM. where do they get $5MM for a lithium trade of this size when it is only a sample?
i think announcements like this only raise more questions about credibility (let alone scalability) instead of driving investors (new and current) to the company to "find out more." when one does try to find out more - it is dead ends or circular loops pointing back towards reconstruction.
good news is there is a 9.6MM offer on BID at 9. bad news is VNDM is back at 9 after being parked at 20 last two weeks.
please - someone explain how this fits in with the company and is even feasible given their current financial state.
(6)
(0)