PutzMueler
5 horas hace
I agree with you for the most part, especially
ovvver, and ovvver, and ovvver here.
In the beginning, Being overly bullish on Mark and his bull-board cronies makes me an idiot (I’m still one in that regard). I can’t figure out why he still running the company. And because he is, and the Board of Directors seem to think he’s doing everything right giving him raises all the time, makes me even more of an idiot.
They should fire him and then fire themselves for what they have done to shareholders.
Which came first the chicken or the egg? The feasibility study or the technical report?
I agree the market doesn’t know shit, but that doesn’t mean the market doesn’t move on its own, due to perception and speculation.
That big surge to $2.90 is not the Bullish end. When the bulls start buying again, and they will, they can easily push it back up to $2.90 without News but news needs to come to get us past that point.
JMO
ColdDarkHole
6 horas hace
This is not bashing or negativity. This is just the status quo here. You get some news, you get the bump, the peasants rejoice for a short time, then the silence settles in, then reality comes back. We start getting NRs about someday projects and news snippets the CEO wrote. That is not news. at all. It has happened ovvver, and ovvver, and ovvver here.
The big difference is we have a shot at some sort of big news now more than we did before. The global mineral talk and saber rattling has goosed the sector. Thats great, BUT do we have an actual harvestable resource regardless of "proven reserves"? Nothing has pointed to the positive there, but what was not palatable before might be OK now regardless of cost or difficulty. Its going good right? Thats what we said to the US Senate in person years ago now. So we are going good right?!
We don't know what is in the nebula. Do we need a big cash raise for the FS? Is the FS holding up RPMGlobal? Does the new administration actually want to move fast on building elk creek? Do we have to go through the entire exim process still? Just how important is the (as far as we know) un-funded FS? We just don't know and neither does the market.
Prudent Capitalist
1 día hace
NCT: I have already covered that issue more than once and have posted here a number of times that it is my understanding that there is no current requirement or mandate for additional drilling, including the response from Jim Sims below on November 22, 2024:
EXIM has not yet made a final decision on whether or not they would like to see us conduct some additional drilling sufficient to move a portion of our probable reserves to proven reserves. If they do request this, we can complete that drilling campaign in about 12 weeks, and that drilling will not impact the time for completion of the Feasibility Study update, which is estimated between 6-9 months. Regardless, we are seeking funding from the U.S. Department of Defense sufficient to cover both the costs of completing the requisite Feasibility Study-level work that EXIM requires and the costs of the additional drilling.
We will publicly announce any material developments on DoD funding, a Stellantis offtake agreement, and other ongoing initiatives when they occur.
Best,
Jim Sims
Chief Communications Officer
NioCorp Developments Ltd.
Jim.sims@niocorp.com
+1 (303) 503-6203
https://www.niocorp.com
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=175429008
Prudent Capitalist
1 día hace
I sent all of NCT's questions to Jim sims in an e-mail, and his responses are set out below in red:
Jim:
A few timely questions if you are able to respond substantively:
First: What are the potential ramifications for NioCorp regarding the potential Agreement with Ukraine for critical minerals and REE’s?
Virtually zero, other than his focus will soon shift more to the domestic mining side once he realizes that, even if he gets some form of mining or resource concessions there, it will be many years before any private company is willing to do exploratory work on land that is littered with unexploded ordinance and where the Russians are still within rocket and artillery range.
Second: How are you and the Executive team viewing the replacement in leadership at EXIM? I know Mark and the rest had a very strong relationship with the former Chair. Are the changes viewed positively for NioCorp?
Yes, on several levels, but I cannot comment on those at this point, given that John is awaiting Senate confirmation and interactions have to be very carefully done.
And Third: Are you able to give an update on where we are with financing to begin or complete an updated BFS?
Close.
Jim Sims
Chief Communications Officer
NioCorp Developments LTD
+1 (303) 503-6203
Jim.Sims@NioCorp.com
https://www.NioCorp.com
The_Gman
1 día hace
Compensation Committee
NOTICE OF MEETING AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION AND PROXY CIRCULAR
Annual General Meeting of Shareholders to be held on March 20, 2025
Page 27
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1512228/000153949725000278/n2574_x244-def14a.htm
The Compensation Committee is currently comprised of Michael J. Morris, as Chair, David C. Beling, Nilsa Guerrero-Mahon, and Dean C. Kehler, all of whom are independent directors. None of the members of the Compensation Committee has been one of our officers or employees at any time. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, the Compensation Committee met two times. A copy of the Compensation Committee’s Charter is available on the Company’s website at www.niocorp.com.
The Compensation Committee’s general duties and responsibilities are to, among other things:
• Review the Company’s executive compensation programs to ensure the attraction, retention and appropriate reward of executive officers;
• Annually review and make recommendations to the independent directors on the Board regarding the corporate goals and objectives applicable to the compensation of the CEO and evaluate at least annually the CEO’s performance in light of those goals and objectives;
• Review and recommend the approval of the CEO’s compensation level to the independent directors of the Board;
• Review and approve, for the Company’s executive officers other than the CEO, annual compensation for such officers;
• Make recommendations to the Board on director compensation and compensation for the Chairman of the Board position;
• Review and administer the Company’s equity and non-equity incentive compensation and other plans;
• Assist the Board in overseeing the development, implementation, and effectiveness of the Company’s strategies and policies regarding human resources and talent management; and
• Review the risks associated with the Company’s compensation policies and practices.
The Compensation Committee may delegate all or a portion of its duties and responsibilities to a subcommittee of the Compensation Committee and may delegate to an officer authority to approve grants and awards, and the terms and conditions of such grants and awards, under any of the Company’s equity incentive-based plans to the extent expressly provided in such plans. A more complete description of the duties and responsibilities of the Compensation Committee is set out in the Compensation Committee’s Charter.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, Michael J. Morris, David C. Beling, Dean C. Kehler, and Nilsa Guerrero-Mahon served on the Compensation Committee. None of these individuals was an employee or an officer of the Company during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, was formerly an officer of the Company, or had any relationship with the Company requiring disclosure under Item 404 of Regulation S-K. In addition, during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024, none of our executive officers served on the compensation committee or full board of any company for which any of Messrs. Morris, Beling, or Kehler or Ms. Guerrero-Mahon (or any of the Company’s other directors) served as an executive officer.
stark12
1 día hace
I was reviewing the proxy documents prior to voting and noted the following: "... the Company’s executive compensation program is designed appropriately and is working effectively to help ensure that the Company compensates its named executive officers for the achievement of performance goals that will enhance shareholder value."
I bolded the part that drew my attention. Does anyone know the specifics about what the performance goals are for each executive? I didn't find the specific goals detailed but maybe I missed them.
Of course, it raises the question as to what the performance goals were for the last annual cycle and whether these goals were met or not.
While I don't think the lack of transparency around these internal metrics is unusual, I would need to be convinced that these lofty sounding statements about performance goals have any true substance. Does the Board of Directors hold the performance reviews of the various executives? Does Mark, as a director, recuse himself from evaluating his own performance as an executive?
So, if all of the company executives are meeting the performance goals that the company and board sets, why has shareholder value plummeted and why does the project remains stalled? To say performance goals that will enhance shareholder value and not deliver actual performance that enhances shareholder value points to failure to meet the performance goals. I understand goals can be aspirational, but talk is cheap. It is well past time to get past the financing finish line and start construction on Elk Creek. Results matter.
The_Gman
2 días hace
Thanks, Richard. Just sharing what I find out there in the public space. While the headline was likely clickbait for anti-Trumpers, I thought they did a fairly good job of balancing that out stating, yeah, there are REMs there, they're just hard to get to and will require significant investment. They also had a link to another article that went more in depth and identifies resources in Ukraine, but interestingly doesn't mention niobium, scandium, neodymium or praseodymium.
https://www.intellinews.com/what-does-ukraine-have-to-offer-the-deal-loving-trump-to-get-his-support-353512/
Ukraine is home to the largest reserves of uranium in Europe; the second-largest reserves of iron ore, titanium and manganese; and the third largest reserves of shale gas, the Washington Post reported. It also has large deposits of the hard-to-find lithium, graphite and other rare earth metals, according to a 2022 report by the Canadian geopolitical risk-analysis firm SecDev.
And then there's this:
https://meta.eeb.org/2022/07/27/a-materials-war-ukraine-and-the-race-for-resources/
A part of the 3 to 11.5 trillion dollars worth of resources in Ukraine is now under Russian boots. This includes elements such as tantalum and niobium that are used for green(er) technologies as well as aviation, transportation and construction. As the amounts of elements like tantalum and niobium are state secrets, it is hard to estimate how much of it is now in Russian hands, but these materials are found in Donetsk and south of Zaporizhzhia, which are occupied by Putin’s invading army.
A lot of moving parts here.
Richard Thomas
2 días hace
Ukraine is indeed rich in rare earth minerals,which are essential for modern technology and various industries. According to research, Ukraine has significant deposits of rare earth elements (REEs) such as lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, erbium, and yttrium12. These elements are used in various applications, including TVs, lighting, wind turbines, electric vehicle batteries, nuclear power, and lasers12.
Additionally, Ukraine has reserves of other critical minerals like lithium, cobalt, scandium, graphite, tantalum, and niobium1. These minerals are crucial for the production of devices for green energy and other advanced technologies1.
The presence of these minerals has been well-documented and proven through various studies and reports. Ukraine's reserves of these critical minerals account for approximately 5% of the world's total reserves.
Above is from Copilot Ai on bing.
Copilot also had several links, some research is needed if you're interested.
The_Gman
2 días hace
Ukraine doesn't have any rare earth metals, and the strategic minerals it does have are not worth trillions of dollars
https://www.intellinews.com/ukraine-doesn-t-have-any-rare-earth-metals-and-the-strategic-minerals-it-does-have-are-not-worth-trillions-of-dollars-368472/
There is currently a lot of confusion over US President Donald Trump’s proposed $500bn deal to gain control over Ukraine’s rare earth metals wealth. The problem is that Ukraine doesn’t have any rare earth minerals; it has a lot of “strategically important metals” like lithium. That is true. But actual rare earth metals? No. Almost none.
At the danger of nitpicking, rare earth metals (REMs) are a group of 17 elements in the periodic table, consisting of the 15 lanthanides (including neodymium, dysprosium, terbium, scandium and yttrium), which are very useful, as they enable the production of sophisticated electronics thanks to the conductivity quirks of their chemical bonds when used in combination with more traditional materials.
A deep dive by Bloomberg Opinion columnist Javier Blas, released on February 19, went into the distinction between the two and undermined Trump’s assumption that Ukraine holds trillion of dollars of valuable minerals.
“What Ukraine has is scorched earth; what it doesn’t have is rare earths. Surprisingly, many people – not least, US President Donald Trump – seem convinced the country has a rich mineral endowment. It’s a folly,” Blas wrote.
There is even a question mark over the economic viability of mining what rare earth metals Ukraine has. One of the few confirmed REM deposits is at Novopoltavske (tantalum, niobium, strontium and magnetite), which was discovered by the Soviets in the 1970s, but even the government says it is “hard to extract” and has remained fallow since then.
Referenced Bloomberg article - need subscription
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-02-19/trump-s-insistence-ukraine-has-rare-earth-elements-is-wrong