Bens Creek Share Discussion Threads

[stocky50] 28/10/2022 11:56

BC have not spend $45m on just 1 HWM'er - Thats a gross oversimplification. They have had to carry out extensive repairs to the infrastructure and have purchased a large stock of yellow equipment.

Still better than $100m? Will be interesting to compare what the 2 mines actually produce.

[seagreen] 28/10/2022 11:37

Interesting to see along with the USA minining sector they also suffered logistical delays in equipment but I guess as they are not run by Adam they are excused....

Funny old world....double standards

Pass the Horseradish



hxxps://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/consol-energy-announces-the-commissioning-of-the-itmann-preparation-plant-301655671.html

The preparation plant commenced operation in Q3 2022 as anticipated, but equipment delays and supply chain bottlenecks have delayed the third and final continuous miner section,

[purchaseatthetop] 28/10/2022 10:44

No worries stocky.
Itmann are busy recruiting endless underground staff. Google Itmann jobs.
They are only mining underground and my guess is that they will produce at a cost of around $70 a ton. That is under half BEN cost per ton.
Check out their infrastructure. They have built a proper long term underground mine. Very impressive.
BEN has now spent $45m as compared to Itmann $100m but what have BEN got? One HWMer that they are renting that can produce 20k tons a month at well over double the cost per ton of Itmann. I know which one I think is better!
Wonder why they did not use HWMer if they are so good?

[stocky50] 28/10/2022 10:36

Thanks for sharing Patt. Interesting to see that they spent $100m to get this up and running - With a capacity similar to BC (900k).

BC has spent a fraction of this!


hxxps://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/consol-energy-announces-the-commissioning-of-the-itmann-preparation-plant-301655671.html

[purchaseatthetop] 28/10/2022 09:26

The new Consol Itmann mine opened last week just round the corner from Bens Creek. They are brand new with a 900k output capacity. Interestingly, Norfolk Southern are an investor in the mine. So, if you want to know where the BEN trains are going, you only need look at the Itmann Mine Number 5.

[seagreen] 27/10/2022 17:36

Just like you said all the Megawall subcontractors were about to down tools and walk off with their HWM's and chose not to interpretate that RNS correctly.

I know I do not recognise those numbers and you were claiming far lower production in the early months when it suited you but I have not got the time to be concerned or worried currently as I know you have the time lines wrong too.

Just because you are bored yawn....we have had this discussion you lost

Its a bit l;ike ENET who recognise Revenue too early and have been froced to admitt they need to push their pathetic little revenue fraud out o a later period.

HA HA HA HA as you would say.

Deviant extremus

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 17:30

Seagreen. I have detailed exactly what the outputs are by month directly from their own RNSs. The fact you do not get it is your problem.

[seagreen] 27/10/2022 17:26

Because you are both such charming and spiffing chaps who never attempt to retrospectively prove your eronious beliefs

I will treat you gratis

Listen very carefully I shall only say this one more time

There is a huge diference between

Average annual output (Total annual production divided by number of months)

and

Current average output in full production (Total production since two shifts divided by number of months two shifts were fully operational)

Slightly diferent here we have an example of our resident liar wishing to hide any improvement in production rates as the two shift ramp up kicks in.

All you have done is work out how you can show the lowest production level with two shifts and overstate the production in earlier period and understate the production in the later periods....

If you were not so pathetically sad you woud be both laughable.

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 16:36

Thank you ohojim. I am very pleased to help the good investors here. One day, hopefully soon, one of my actual shares will have some RNS that excites me. Until then I am dedicated to BEN.

[ohojim] 27/10/2022 16:31

By the way Patt, that was a most excellent post 7643, that should probably go in the header, as it lays out and answers all the questions regarding production that is in the public domain, in a very succinct and professional manner. You should be an accountant I reckon.

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 16:24

Well it wasn’t me because I think Seagreen is a c*nt.

This is about to drop below 25p. Not looking good.

[ohojim] 27/10/2022 16:21

Hmmmmmm. Anyone know who said this earlier today?


"But FFS lets try and put personal hatred of individual;s aside and try and keep the thread relevant, unbiased, interesting and civilised to encourage open debate. (If possible)."

[papillon] 27/10/2022 15:32

All small size trades so far today.

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 15:22

OK...lets see what was produced and when as per their own RNSs:

30/8/22 Final Results RNS:
Ø Stock of raw and clean coal of 21.8k tons as at 31 March 2022, valued at $1.5m
Ø Total raw coal production of 64.8k tons of which 43.5k tons sold in the three months to March 2022

so, in four months to 31/3/22 as they started mining 1/12/21 the clean coal equivalent of 64.8k ROM is 32.4k. So 8.1k tons a month.

6/6/22 Commencement of Rail Delivery RNS:
"With the necessary buildup of Inventory (circa 30,000 tons of clean and 5,000 tons of ROM, equating to circa $12m of revenue), ahead of the first train arriving"

30k clean plus 5k ROM is the equivalent of 32.5k clean as at 30/5/22
Stock carried forward 1/4/22 was 21.8k ROM which is equivalent of 10.8k clean
So output for April and May was 32.5k-10.8k equals 21.7k clean tons.

so, in two months April and May 22 they produced 10.85k tons each month.

30/8/22 Final Results RNS:

"ü 184k raw tons of coal have been stockpiled"m (April to August).

That 184k tons is equivalent of 92k clean tons for 5 months April to August 22
Take off 21.7k tons calculated for April and May
Therefore output for June to August (three months) was 60.5k clean tons.

so, in three months June to August 22 they produced 20.2k clean tons per month

So, we have it exactly....
Dec 21. 8.1k
Jan 22 8.1k
Feb 22 8.1k
Mar 22 8.1k
Apr 22 10.85k
May 22 10.85k
Jun 22 20.2k
Jul 22 20.2k
Aug 22 20.2k

and that makes absolute sense as second shift would have doubled production in late May 22.
It is also why the share price is where it is. Why should it have to be me to demonstrate this truth? You shareholders should not need a naysayer to point out the shape of output and have Adam talking rubbish on Sunday Roast. The facts are that they cannot exceed 20k per month and at that rate it loses money because it is so expensive to contour bench mine with HWMers when you have to build the benches.

[seagreen] 27/10/2022 12:47

Good moaning Patt

Listen very carefully I shall only say this once

There is a huge diference between

Average annual output (Total annual production divided by number of months)

and

Current average output in full production (Total production since two shifts divided by number of months two shifts were fully operational)

SG

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 12:10

Glad Seagreen has retired from this board. Otherwise we might have overly long posts to read…zzzzzzzzzz…..

I deal in RNSs. They say average output for last five months was 17k tons and August was 12k ton. That was one HWMer, two shifts and good weather. Adam might say they are doing 40k tons a month but he has been saying that since May and it is clearly rubbish. Only RNSs count. Sunday Roast is rubbish for idiots.

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 11:43

Stocky. You say that cost per ton will fall with higher output due to Operational Gearing…fixed costs within production.

I would question that. The Megahighwall contract is cost per ton mined ROM so that would not change. There may be some fixed costs within processing but these would be relatively minor. I do not see cost per ton dropping much.

[purchaseatthetop] 27/10/2022 11:33

Stocky. They have been operating a double shift HWMer since May and never got above 17k tons per month. Why would they ever get to 40k tons?

The facts are, and the reality is, as I have posted for months and months, that HWMing is excellent to extend the mining in an existing open pit mine where it is now more economic to scavenge as the edges to mine deep into these seams. Or on a low gradient existing contour bench mine where the same can be done. Where it is completely inefficient is in narrow and steep West Virginia where contour benches have to be build just to then mine. The volume of rock and the required blasting means you have to shift 100k tons of rock to mine 1km of seam and get 40k tons of coal.

That is why they have really struggled. West Virginia is underground mining for a reason.

[papillon] 27/10/2022 11:10

Any miner, whether mining met coal, gold, copper, or iron ore, etc, depends 100% on the price of met coal, gold, copper, or iron ore, respectively, for profitability. Whether it is profitable, or whether it goes bust!
Many previously profitable US met coal miners went bust around 8 - 10 years ago as the Met coal price plummeted.
If you think the met coal price will hold steady, or rise, then buy and hold BEN. If you think it will fall then sell. Simples.

[stocky50] 27/10/2022 10:57

oh and ... 1m tonnes of annual production by April 2023 - is very plausible if production goes to 80,000 / month with the 2nd HWM'er.

The actual time to ramp-up, although important, is insignificant in the life of a mine (which could be 10's of years in the future).

As I pointed out earlier - The Management have achieved a lot in a short amount of time.

[stocky50] 27/10/2022 10:54

Patt - Am not disagreeing with you in that the ramp up to production has been slower than anticipated. All i am saying is that now that BC is at circa 40,000 / month, i do expect the ramp up to 80,000 per month will happen.

I think your cost analysis is overstated. There would have been huge operational costs during the ramp-up period which will distort production costs / tonne. We will only really get to know this once the production is stabilised near full production.

And remember - the cost per tonne will go down significantly as production increases - due simply to the fact that the fixed costs will now be absorbed by higher production.

In my estimate NET MARGIN give certain levels of production is an easier metric to get your head around.

I say again - Its difficult to measure a company based on past performance during a growth /. ramp-up period. This needs to be viewed on current production (which we have been told is 40k/ tonne) and then factor in the increase.