Are Gold, Silver, Platinum, and Lithium Bull Markets Topping Out? | Joe Mazumdar

Summary

• Commodity Markets: Joe Mazumdar discusses the performance of commodities like gold, silver, platinum, and lithium, noting significant price increases and market dynamics influenced by geopolitical factors and currency fluctuations.
• Gold Equities: The impact of rising gold prices on equities, especially non-cash flowing junior companies, is highlighted, with a focus on North American demand and the role of ETFs in driving equity performance.
• Mergers and Acquisitions: There is an increase in M&A activity, particularly in acquiring producing assets and land packages, with companies like Raina Silver and Torx being mentioned as examples of recent deals.
• Investment Strategies: Mazumdar emphasizes the importance of investing in companies with strong management teams capable of building projects, particularly those listed on the ASX, which are more inclined to develop projects independently.
• Jurisdictional Risks: The discussion covers the risks associated with investing in certain jurisdictions, such as Mexico and Argentina, and the importance of selecting projects in favorable regions to mitigate geopolitical and operational risks.
• Technological Advancements: The role of technology and innovation in mining, such as direct lithium extraction and AI applications, is discussed as a means to overcome supply chain challenges and improve project viability.
• Private Funding: The potential for private funding from venture capitalists, particularly in the U.S., is explored as an alternative to traditional public market funding, with a focus on companies applying new technologies to mining challenges.
• Portfolio Management: Mazumdar shares insights into his portfolio strategy, which includes a mix of exploration and development plays across various jurisdictions, with a focus on commodities like copper, gold, and rare earths.

Transcript

Today on Resource Talks, Joe Mazumar is going to be talking to me about gold, silver, platinum, copper, lithium, and hopefully a bunch of things in between as well as what companies he's liking right now. And uh maybe what could go wrong for the overall um wellperforming commodity segment otherwise. Uh just briefly for people watching or listening, if you want a summary of this conversation and all the other interviews that we do on resource talks, go to resourcetalks.com. There's a free newsletter. It goes out once a week with a bullet point summary of all the conversations from the week before. And uh Joe, no pleasantries needed. Not really possible when talking to me anyways. But thank you for being here today. >> Thanks for the invite, Antonio. I guess we talked so much last time that uh we we just collectively have enough to to do a long interview now. >> Exactly. I think at one point we did like a 3-hour episode and we weren't even matching shirts that time and now we're matching shirts so we should probably be stronger this time even. >> No kidding, eh? Well, I mean we don't want to, you know, set the bar too high here. >> And uh it's not pink, is it? Cuz I I don't classify what I'm wearing as pink. >> No, no, this is magenta. And any geologist worth his salt knows what magenta is. It's above red when you're doing a geochemical analysis and the soil little square gives you magenta. That means that's good. >> Well, that sounds a bit like a justification, but I'll leave it at that cuz I'm wearing a similar color right there. But, uh, no, the I I really am looking forward to having this conversation because you and I have been talking about gold for what, three or so years now and and you were directionally very correct on where it's going and even just this year it's up what 35% yearonear and so silver is up as well. I want to talk about that. But is it time for a breeder on gold here though? you think it's got some more room to run or is this kind of the top? >> Yeah, I mean there's one thing about the gold price uh the precious metals price and then there's the equities and so uh we're probably most concerned u you know because we deal mostly with the non-cash flowing companies. Uh we're we're concerned about the impact of the gold price on the equities that we buy shares in. like I do own gold and stuff like that but you know most of my exposure to that commodity would be in the derivative which is the juniors and the impact on those. So I I would say the gold price um has done very well and and I was tracking it u in terms of uh like to the uh the end of uh 2024 so full year the last 18 months let's say uh 12 and six yeah 18 months and it's been up uh the the the gold price in US dollars is up about 28% 30% uh from from that period and u And I was thinking at that time because you know uh when I worked for Newmont one thing like when Pierre Lassan was there he had always said like it's a bull market when the commodity is up in multiple currencies. That's definitely the case with with gold but I was expecting that that the Australian dollar and the Canadian dollar might have been weaker and that one might have been performed better but it actually didn't. uh the US dollar one actually performed better as both the Canadian dollar and during that period the Australian dollar actually strengthened >> uh which was unusual. Um so uh in terms of of gold let's look at you know what's driving it is usually it's real interest rates you know how which direction are you directionally where you real rates going and real rates weren't doing very much uh let's probably say in the latter part of last year it had a bit of a pump and then it sort of was going flat and then directionally we had a change of government uh in the US that created a lot of uncertainty in terms of tariffs uh um you know import export restrictions and stuff like that drove a lot of Asian demand. So before it was central bank demand which does not bleed into equities. It it it you know makes the price I mean the the cash flow of producers better but it doesn't really change the sentiment for a junior to go to the market and say oh you know I I need money. Mhm. >> But then we had this you know total I don't want to say uh I mean uncertainty let's just say all that uncertainty b you know instilled uh demand Asian demand and so you could see that when you look at the London AM and PM price and the PM price is basically Asian demand and that was trading at a premium to the AM price. That's telling you that there was a lot more Asian demand. Um and the LME was getting tight. We had a little uh what do you call it? An anomaly with the um with that little paper that came out that maybe there would be a a tariff on incoming gold bullion into the US where the comx uh you know uh premium went up to I don't know was 25% of the price or something like that. Ridiculous. like when I used to trade gold back in the uh 2000s, you know, 6 cents or 6% was a was a big deal because the copper price was a buck then. Um, you know, but this is like it was like a blowout like ridiculous and it sort of changed trading patterns for a little while. That didn't that didn't resonate very long because you know the policy was changed or whatever implication was changed. the underlying demand again real rates but then all the uncertainty driving physical demand but if we're concerned about the equities what really drives equities is mostly North American demand for gold ETFs that bleeds into gold equity ETFs which bleeds into majors which eventually bleeds downwards and trickles down into single asset producers developers the higher risk going down and that changes the financing environment for juniors which we've seen a lot of upsized financings um and not only in gold uh you know in copper as well and in other critical minerals or security minerals um as a lot of different sources of funding are coming now we see more private equity uh we see the royalties and streamers going crazy with respect to always hitting 52- week highs and record levels and they're big and and a lot of M&A Okay. So, of the 28 companies I'm looking at for the upcoming letter uh exploration insights letter is um you know I would say about you know a quarter of them did M&A >> this last 12 months. >> Um uh some of that M&A a lot of that M&A I would say would be for producing assets. Um, and now we we're seeing some M&A for people with land uh like Raina Silver with uh with um what was it? Uh Torx uh you know uh I think it was Agnes Gold with with Weston. So we may see more of people looking at uh non-cash flowing assets now because the idea with uh with buying producing assets it's already permit the tailings is done the capital escalation risk is low it's already in operation you know uh that's and I'm willing to pay a premium on that and most of the guys that bought have done well because the gold price has just gone up since they made that purchase. uh now it's sort of like do I take the risk and look at growth most of the cash flow that they've been making has now been expended predominantly on giving back to shareholders and mostly the big companies dividends but a lot of people with these normal course issuer bids which are the share buybacks that's been a big deal and so a lot of that cash is sort of saying you know what there's not a lot I can invest in you know organically or inorganically that's better than investing in myself, >> you know, uh as opposed to investing in a in a new asset, build one, I just should buy my own shares. Uh as opposed to buying a company, >> I should just buy my own shares. And that has been uh has been profitable for them. Uh I don't know if that's going to keep going. Um because as we were talking off off uh off screen uh that when I was looking at the financials a lot of the thematic would be like flat to production going down the first half of this year versus first half of last year. >> Uh costs going slightly up uh but the gold price first half of last year to first is is up about 35 to 40%. M so it's all gold price you know uh you know that's what drove you know margins expanding free cash flow generation and then that free cash flow generation is going to all these uh other uh uh buybacks or dividends and some M&A but most of the M&A I would say because their share price has done so well has been uh all share transactions or a mix uh because people are you are willing to take their paper. >> There's I've actually been wondering why that's not happening more and it's good to see, you know, some of the capital come back to to shareholders here at least with some of these companies. But, you know, the um the juniors, and I don't mean the GDXJ, I mean, the the tree penny dreadfuls, you know, the explore and developers, if you will, that that I like wasting money on. They're not moving up as a collective, right? I mean, a couple of things are moving up >> the index and say, "Hey, it's all uh yeah, there's not a good index for it, but you're right. It's not all boats are getting raised here." >> Yeah. What So, what's it going to take for for all boats to rise essentially? Is that something we're really even ever going to see? That's something that I've been wondering about. >> Well, I would say that we shouldn't see that. I don't want to see that. You know why I don't want to see that is then we're going to have a lot more misallocation of capital. Uh because not everybody should get funded. There's got to be a a gate for capital. You know, this is a good project. This is a good management team. This is a good jurisdiction. Yes, you pass. Um you're you know, you guys don't have any technical expertise. You've never worked in this jurisdiction. Uh you don't have a lot of people with deep pockets that are behind you. maybe you shouldn't get a pass. Uh so I would like to see a little bit more uh let's say uh constraint that's going to the juniors and that misallocation of capital will stop us from going through another cycle where people get burned and then have a reluctance to invest you know next time. So what I would prefer to see is that the right people with the right projects in the right jurisdictions get money and that's what I'm seeing. I'm seeing those people get overs subscribed. I'm seeing those people have a lot of access to capital when they don't even need it. Uh, you know, uh, again, it goes back to the old Pieran saying, you know, feed the ducks when they're quacking cuz, uh, you know, when you're playing the game of a non-cash flowing junior, you usually take the money when you can, >> but you always want to raise it at a higher level. um you know, but I've still seen people uh and some companies in the portfolio raising money with and it's a bit of advertising, I guess. You get the right people that will talk about your company, uh but you issue them warrants, you know, it's all public, you know, you're issuing them a three-year warrant uh at a premium, you know, but not a significant premium uh you know um to get the big names talking about your stock. >> Yeah. you know, uh, and and you know, and I saw that with one company, you know, I thought, "Wow, Jesus, this wasn't the greatest transaction because the last time you did a strategic transaction at a premium with no warrants with a uh with a with a, you know, mid-tier producer, now you're doing it with, you know, um, you know, bigname people, but you've issued them warrants at not a significant premium. the unit was uh you know at a discount but at the end of the week they closed at a premium to what they uh issued those stocks at. So that's the kind of market we're dealing with. We're dealing with uh a lot of like look at Londinine gold single asset producer high margin but in Ecuador right and in terms of EV per ounce it blows away the competition. >> Yeah. you know, it just blows away the competition. But that's not like because of the jurisdictional risk. Not one I would say would be the one everybody goes to, but it's funded, you know, it's got the Lundines behind it. It's got the right people that own it, you know, and it does very well. Uh, but but that wouldn't be the one I would pick. Uh but well now what we're seeing now is some marginal stuff that made negative free cash flow in the first half of last year and they're making incrementally positive free cash flow. Those stocks have done obviously very well as well. Uh but they're still those some of those have still got big big net debt burdens. You know that they haven't gone away because they're not making that much cash flow. They're just making on a percentage infinitely more than they did the first half of last year. Are you telling me I would make more money on on worse companies because I can I can do that for sure. I can pick those. >> Well, they have to be cash flowing. They have to have exposure to the precious metal. They can't be don't do worse companies on the juniors cuz they'll never get funded. Uh right. But you know some you know >> back in the day you know uh you know there was a company called Clawude Resources that had an asset uh in Manitoba and that of you know that wasn't their primary asset but they you know they got it uh they started producing uh you know uh but they had uh negative uh you know negative working capital. They had a big debt burden. So they were trading like flat and then they started getting some decent intersections you know uh they were starting to increase the throughput and the stock went nuts you know uh and part of that was because you know of their capital uh position before and so they went from very low numbers to very high and on a percentage basis they did very well and eventually got taken out by SSR mining. So that can happen, but I wouldn't try to do that as a uh you know uh it's it's almost like doing a an opposite. It it it's a call position. Uh but it it can be very risky because they need to make that free cash flow to put that debt aside and cover their uh you know cover their interest burdens. So uh it is a risky game if you if you play it. uh you know when you can make you know 75% on the GDXJ you know why why play that game? Hm. >> Well, reverse psychology. That's a a topic my wife knows a lot about. Maybe I should consult her when I'm picking these stocks. But, uh, how's how's your portfolio doing, by the way, this year? Do you like measure year-to- date numbers or how do you are you outerforming that GDXG? >> Yeah. No, we measure over the long term, but also we measure short term, and then I I I show the subscribers every week how it's done. And and a lot of what's done well for me has been grassroots exploration. A lot of it has been copper, some of it gold. Uh you know, one of my top picks in uh silver and gold, which is a developing play, which usually doesn't do great, is has been one of the top performers and uh done well. Um uh another one has been in terms of cash flow, another royalty generator that's cash flowing has done exceptionally well. Uh we had one taken out which was good. >> Uh that did uh that was great because that position was like a 5-year position and you know we made eight times our money on that one. >> Uh so yeah it's a little bit like all the boats you know uh going up. But I mean some of these companies are not precious metals. They're copper grassroots. Uh and that's because of discovery and good drill results. Um, others are, you know, rare earths, uh, that that market has changed. Uh, that's a lot more nuanced because you really need good technical people there. So, it's not just, oh, I just put all my money on, uh, gold producers and just wrote it. Uh, you know, it's still a mixed portfolio that's still done well and beaten its benchmarks. But I I would say that you know uh you know that that's because of the people that are running those companies, their access to capital and technically they're very good. >> Uh and and also that they've hit some really interesting results. Like I'm still adding companies, but the you know the last company I I added uh was a nickel company. >> You know, it wasn't gold uh because of the valuation. You know, you're looking at it, you go, "Wow." and and then you see what they're drilling and you go, "Wow, that's that's crazy." It's just and but nobody's nobody's got their eye on that ball, >> you know? Uh so so this is a good way of reallocating some wins into things that might be uh nent uh and still still growing, you know. >> That's a good point because I've been thinking about what to add myself. I actually don't really like bull markets. Uh, and um I just talked to Neil Atad about it. He doesn't like bull markets either, but for a different reason. For me, it's just because I'm a cheapkate. Like I I just like cheap stuff and and value, I suppose you could put it that way. Is there a specific subsection though of of of anything that you're paying attention to right now like you know more explorers versus developers and this is about going forward because I I understand what you made money on but like or maybe I don't know Finland because of growing attention or epiothermal systems because of some innovation or whatever. anything like that. >> So, you know, like like we said, you know, we've made some money and you know, the way to close out is is something like um like I'll give you the name Origin Royalties. Uh we closed that position. They spun out another company. We kept it, but the winnings from that reallocation uh into another precious metal play, which is exploration in southern Chile. And so that's gold and silver. And jurisdictionally like I think Chile's on the upside. They're changing governments. It's going to be right. Uh and the permitting is going to be easier there. And Chile's always been, you know, always been a good jurisdiction politically, but now it's going to be so much better because now the left-wing guy is gone. Uh and mining is basically back on the radar for them. So, uh I'm looking for more exposure to Chile. Uh, but I picked this one up because it was gold and silver. Uh, and uh, and it's ASX listed, so it might have been discounted. So, that's the other thing is where it's listed. So, uh, copper and silver are are underexposed in in the ASX. And so, some of those companies don't get the exposure because uh, that's not when people are looking for silver, they usually don't look to the ASX. Um, and so, uh, so I picked that one up. I know eventually they'll probably list in the TSX as well, but before they hit that, I wanted to get in. You know, I know the people. I know they have access to capital. So, that was one I added. Uh, another one I added, uh, was a, uh, nickel thing in, uh, in Minnesota. Uh, and why? Um, you know, I think just like we were talking before about lithium, uh, it's a nuanced market, but I think, uh, nickel has the opportunity to rebound. Um, uh, and Minnesota historically has not been a great place jurisdictionally. uh you know we've had Twin Metals and some other projects close to the boundary waters which is the drainage into the Great Lakes that have been uh you know stopped uh by the state uh NOS's and stuff like that very negative and I'm not saying that under the current administration that any of those projects will get reestablished but projects outside that drainage that have changed their mind plans to accommodate all the negativity or all the issues that people have brought them. In this kind of environment, you you'll be harder pressed to, you know, when somebody does all their work and checks all the boxes to still say no. Uh and because now with the job situation, what's happening to stop a project that might add 250 to 500 direct and and you know, maybe more indirect jobs, it's hard for the governor of a state to say no. uh um and especially when you've done all the uh you know the the minations with respect to permitting both federally and state uh and and every place is different. Some places the federal permitting exposure is higher, but in the current administration in the US, that's less of a risk. Uh, and if you're in a good state like Nevada, Arizona, uh, which is very promining, uh, you know, you're laughing. And hence, you know, that issue that we were going to talk about, the resolution mining and Riointo and BHP meeting with the with the US administration this week, which is a big deal because that project has been there for decades. uh and whether and it's more important now obviously with the copper. >> Yeah. Who do you who do you think though and and I do want to get to that. I'm not going to ignore that part about about Trump and and the copper situation with uh resolution. But who do you think is next on the M&A um on the M&A front here? M&A also seems to have sped up a bit as you mentioned. Do do you think we're going to see more M&A in the US because of that is or or Yeah. Where do you see the next leg of M&A? >> Well, I mean I I think what I'm hoping uh is we'll see more development assets come and and that's really where we're looking for is those non-cash flowing assets that might still have issues raising enough debt because there's not enough people that want to, you know, give these companies debt. Um, and so where are they going to get it from without having to do, let's say, a uh a crippling stream on their main product, which I'm I'm not in favor of. Um, so that's what I want to see. I want to see more of that kind of M&A and not just strategic placements, but an absolute, okay, we're going to build this project. You know, this one looks good. We're willing to take that risk on capital, on permitting if it's not permitted, blah blah blah. What I'm finding now is that it's best to put your money in companies that actually have the management team to build a project, not a fake one, not a guy that's just done technical reports and stuff like that, but has never built a project in their lives. You want people that have that mentality. And I would say there's more of those kind of people with ASX listed companies than there are TSX listed companies. more TSX listed companies are more into the transition. Okay, then we'll bring in a company and then this is where we'll get taken out. Blah blah blah blah blah. They'll never build it. Whereas ASX companies tend to pick assets that they think that they can build themselves that don't need 5 to7 billion to build, you know, uh that they can manage themselves. And so when you have that uh you know that idea that you're running let's say to the end zone in terms of uh American football analogy uh it's hard to get tackled >> uh sometimes uh you know if you're standing still uh you if you really want value appreciation let's say more yardage you got to be running to the end zone and you have to have that kind of commitment that you know well if I don't get the best deal on the M&A, I'll just build it myself because I can get a bigger premium once I'm in production. You know, I I have a permit, I've built the project, blah blah blah blah blah, and I don't mind doing that. Um, but a lot of people can't won't give I mean, that impression is fake and it's and it's probably reflected in their share price that uh you know, it's always going to be a takeout. They'll never build it. Um and so you know there is a bit of a nuance between ASX and TSX management teams with respect to that. >> Totally. I I did a a whole episode on this not too long ago with um Mark Bennon of now S2 resources but before that some other stuff in in the meantime and uh there's definitely is a big difference there also culturally again something that I discussed with Neil Atan recently as well but uh you're right to your point though of those development assets again going back to what you said about um uh the Trump stuff and resolution essentially but BHP and Riotinto have spoken to Donald Trump in the White House. It's uh just just now happened, right? It's talking about resolutions. It's a copper project in Arizona and just just a couple of days after the the US um the the the US court blocked the the transfer of Oak Flat, right? And a couple of things are going on there. I don't really know what's going on there, but it does look interesting. And so what that's making me think is is this a a actual pivot? Like is this signal or is it more noise? Is it a pivot to US political support for large resource projects or is it just noise and just another piece of news? >> Well, I so so under the Biden administration that original land swap was approved or it might have been under Obama. I can't remember. But but then the NOS's came in and they took it to court and then they got the land swap like revoked and so it went backwards a step and so they've been going backwards and forwards. Uh but this current administration um that sort of risk I don't think exists you know where and just like with Trilogy um you know the ADA the Alaska development uh agency or whatever they got the road approved the 311 milei road which was very good for Trilogy and South 32 that want to build the Arctic VMS uh copper project in western Alaska. Then the NOS's came in and said, "Oh, you didn't talk to these three villages, you know, that have 50 people in them." And they went through a fiveyear permitting, you know, uh, thousands of pages of documentation. And so then these people said, "Oh, yeah, well, you didn't do this." And so that risk of going back to the courts and then the uh the uh the Bureau of Land Management, you know, sort of saying, "Oh, yeah, no, okay. We're not going to touch this. you know, we're going to suspend your permit. That is not going to happen under the current administration. Once you get it, you're done. >> Um, you know, and I think there's there's much more force in that than there was under the uh the the previous administrations. Uh, so I think that is the flip >> tribal and first nation challenges essentially. Yeah, those challenges uh once everyone's gone through their permitting and done checked all the boxes uh you know uh somebody coming in at the uh you know at the midnight hour and saying oh hey you didn't talk to this guy or oh we don't like this uh I don't see the BLM or the US Forestry Service now bending backwards and saying okay we're scared of getting sued uh I don't think that's going to happen but I I'm not saying that the federal government can permit a project that the state doesn't want. If the local municipality and the people there don't want it, the federal government can't make it happen. Like Pebble, I think, is still a high-risisk project, you know. Uh but South 32, uh Trilogy and Arctic has become a less risky project. It's still going to take a long time to build. The road will take a long time. All that will still take time, but uh you know the current administration uh you know I you know I don't think they're going to go back on the road obviously like they last time. I I think that uh you know projects in Arizona that have any federal issues some of them may u you know they won't be issues anymore uh like like resolution. Uh so I I see the federal issue uh like the permitting for uh perpetua's stimite project >> that took a long time a lot of feasibility studies a lot of drawn out permitting the state wanted it very pro uh but uh you know the federal government you have to deal with the forestry service and the BLM uh you know joint process all other rigomemoral um you know and and that got permanent and then that you know it's got a letter a letter of intent with uh the export import bank to give them a significant wad of capital at a low cost uh for basically you know for the antimony which is probably only 10% of the revenue >> uh because it's a gold project so this uh I think is a positive for the US uh but state by state you still got to look at where you are it's very similar to Argentina in that Argentina now the federal government is very pro-development they've developed a scheme where any investment over 200 million you get special tax breaks, duties breaks, all this other stuff uh if you spend, you know, 70% of that money within a certain period of time and blah blah blah. But it's very pro- federal. But that pro- federal regime uh tax structure and that won't save you in a bad province. Like if you're in Chaboot and Pan-Americ wants to build Na'viad, if the locals still don't want the project, it doesn't matter what the federal government says because it's still a provincial thing with respect to development. Yeah. >> But if you're in the best state >> in the States, >> it's a lot easier. If you're in the best province in Argentina, >> the federal government uh makes it easier. >> Well, supposedly fortune favors the brave. So if someone is brave, what do they do here? Is it like you're saying no, it's not Nordan Dynasty? Is Pebble still challenged from the locals perspective? What is it that you do do? Like is what what's what's undervalued right now but has that potential upside again with risk? >> Yeah, I I would say like if you're into development and let's say you're in Arizona, the US wants copper and people got to understand the difference between cathode and concentrate. So resolution will not right now produce cathode. Right now their idea would be to produce a concentrate. That concentrate has to be smelted. Right now we don't have the smelting capacity in the US for that project. So somebody would either have to permit a new smelter or we introduce another way of uh producing cathode from that concentrate which you can do at lower recoveries or you send it overseas to be smelted. Uh so that's one project you copper world Mitsubishi has come in and are now helping them fund that project by taking I believe a chunk out of it and they would produce concentrates as well. Mitsubishi's interest would be in the offtake to take that concentrate to Japan. Uh Ivanho Electric, they put out, I believe, a PFS on their project uh which they are looking to produce cathode on and that's just south of the project uh called Cactus Park Salier that's owned by Arizona Sonora. I think that's still probably undervalued with respect to what else is happening in Arizona. Uh so that's my that's how I play that. Uh but interestingly uh is they don't need much federal government help because they've been over the last several years going out of their way to buy private property. So it was only state and they've never had what they call the waters of the United States Wus. So they never need u a uh 404 permit from the US Corps of Engineers. Uh so they've already mitigated most of that risk and so a lot of companies may be looking for help for the federal government in that uh and they will be producing cathodes. They don't really need it uh because their project uh doesn't require much if any federal permitting. It's all state and so they probably have one of the lower risk uh permitting uh paths uh for for for what they're trying to do there. Do you think this could lower the interest in other copper jurisdictions though? Because like if the US opens the door massively, does that make uh jurisdictions where political risk was for example higher, does that make them less interesting because now you can do it domestically? Um yeah, I mean the thing is about copper with the US usually, I mean because they haven't been a big manufacturing place for probably since I used to live there in the 2000s. Uh it started going away in the 2000 when China the super cycle and all that. Ship all the manufacturing and all those jobs away, which they're trying to retrieve now. uh it's a different dynamic whether they'll ever replace the manufacturing capacity that existed 25 years ago I have my doubts uh because it still needs that kind of skill set which they don't have >> u so it will have an incremental impact no doubt uh but it it can't replace the amount of copper that goes into washing machines cars whatever uh you know that they actually need uh but it will uh you know it'll be some because the US in terms of endowment of minerals is not starved it's not China they have they have endowment their problem is permitting that endowment uh you know on public lands mostly that's always been an issue uh but now there's more of an impetus if you want this it does exist in your country you just have to develop it and if you develop it now you have to refine it and all those downstream processings are getting highlighted you know like you know there's no point in us making an intermediate product that we have to send to China you know we have to make the ultimate product that the car companies want or you know whoever wants uh we have to make that product but that involves a more u vertical integrated vertically integrated strategy that didn't always exist >> I've actually always been thinking about Uh that's not true. Not always. But I have been thinking about it. Why do majors not spend more money on political lobbying in the US and you know pick up projects that might have been challenging from the permitting perspective before that from companies that don't have the deep pockets to do that lobbying and then spend money on lobbying for those projects. And it seems like that's it's it's kicking off right now. Do you think we're going to see more of that? >> I I would say the lobbying issue especially with projects like Resolution has always been there. They do a lot of lobbying. Uh but the problem is that they have to deal with somebody that uh you know, no matter how much money you spend, that First Nations group doesn't want the project. You know, uh you you you'll hit a wall. Um so that that doesn't impact the obstruction. Uh now it's the federal government that's just sort of going over that wall for you. Uh and so all that cumulative lobbying you've done is now reaping its benefits. Uh probably I mean at Newmont we used to lobby to lift a cyanide ban in I believe Montana at one point. Uh you know um so there's always lobbying uh there. Uh it's it's a well-known sort of uh exercise uh that people do uh especially in states that mining is big deal. It doesn't matter if you're Democrat or Republican. If if mining is a big deal in your state, you'll promote mining. >> What else do you have in terms of those projects? Like you mentioned uh Trilogy Perpetual with their stibide gold project. Um what is there? Riyolite uh >> Riyolite Ridge the one in uh Lithium in uh Nevada. >> Nevada. Yeah. KSM. >> KSM's in British Columbia though. >> Yeah. Yeah. I but but at the same time I'm just thinking from the perspective of lobbying uh like our >> yeah like I would say that thing that I mentioned in Minnesota talon medals >> uh you know that one was permitting was always an issue because of all the projects in Minnesota that weren't getting permitted that hit a wall u they're not in that drainage basin that goes to the great lakes they'll go all underground and they have basically decided to put their plant which they've got a letter of intent with one of the federal government agencies to build in North Dakota and not in Minnesota so they won't have a tailings facility. Uh so they've gone around all the issues that people have had they basically tried to eliminate them and they've eliminated them. So now the uh state government that was piling on the negativity because they thought nobody wanted the project but now they see the job potential and they see that they've gone out of their way to have a permittable project have now invited them to the Minnesota State Fair to sort of say hey show us your wares here at the Department of Natural Resources part of the Minnesota State Fair and also there's a little bit of a nuance saying hey why are some of these jobs going to North Dakota. Well, because you wanted us to build the facility, the processing facility there. So, could that change? I don't know. But, you know, so, so a lot of that nuance is changing because of the tariffs, because of uh higher paying jobs that are related to mining, which is considered manufacturing, >> uh, and people trying to uh add them. I know, you know, Minnesota is a Democratic state. it like Michigan, it's much easier than than Minnesota to permit things. But again, it's hard now in any state when you've got a company that's gone through all of the steps that are required and to not let them permit it, when you've done the the the local First Nations, when you've done the social license to operate and then say, "No, we don't want the project." That's harder to do in this current environment. >> Yeah. Well, but and so to that point as well, it's like what I said with with KSM and that's not the only uh project up in Canada where you might have provincial uh but not federal approval. So my point was more like are we going to see more lobbying from you know the larger companies that do have deep pockets in different jurisdictions because it's happening in the US and because the US is giving in and kind of opening the door to that idea as a whole. Are we going to see it in in other jurisdictions where maybe they're not, you know, topic duour and people are not thinking about them right now, but they could be those undervalued opportunities? >> Yeah, I I would say uh Canada's a bit different than states in terms of permitting. Uh so there's projects um you know that uh you know that you might be concerned about permitting that are probably not permitting issues and more capital issues because they lack infrastructure. and who's going to build that power line or who's going to build that tunnel uh you know under a mountain uh to get your ore out. U those are more of the issues I see in places like uh British Columbia or the Yukon >> uh and and Northern Ontario and some places like the Ring of Fire. Um uh Quebec has more infrastructure, roads, power. Uh but still, you know, some of those projects are are are rather remote, but infrastructurally because they have done a lot of forestry, the access is a lot better. I mean, granted, a lot of the money has come from Alberta with uh with uh with funding the transfer payments, uh but they've built their province out infrastructurally. That's not the case obviously in the Yukon where they've only got 40,000 people and they don't have the tax base. Need federal government help to build a road. You know, do we ever extend the power line from British Columbia into the Yukon? That'll cost you at least $2 billion and take about 5 years, maybe 5 years just to permit. Uh so are we going to do those big things like Canada is not the US. We don't have a US Department of Defense that has all this money that we could just reallocate, you know, uh, you know, we don't have a Department of Energy which has a big budget that we can reallocate. We don't have that kind of money. And since we're not interested in China coming in and building it for us, uh, and now the US is more into building their own infrastructure and not building infrastructure for other people. And now we have that, you know, 51st state talk and the tariffs and all that. there's less of a relationship with the US and Canada in terms of building up assets or resources or nearshoring here. >> Is that only copper though? Because I mean the focus or where we kicked off this conversation about this specific topic was copper resolution, right? Is it only is it only copper? Are we going to see it uh are we going to see more support overall for for other metals as well? I mean you was talking about gold being a critical metal now as well. So >> uh in in terms of the states in terms of helping the permit yeah no it'll like talent is nickel nickel and copper and PGs potentially um I I would say yes absolutely copper but I mean like I said perpetual gold and antimony uh what you will see is also rare earth but mostly on processing uh they'll make that uh much easier to do >> uh and you'll you'll have people wanting to attract these people >> uh you know uh so but the problem in the processing part the mining part's easy uh especially for critical minerals the part it's hard is processing because over the last two plus decades China has built up all the technical capacity and intellectual uh property uh in in processing and processing for critical minerals is much more important than mining it and and so when if you invest invest in these kind of companies, you got to understand that they understand uh what they're doing with respect to getting that product that can that's salailable. We've had those issues in lithium where somebody produces a technical lithium product which can't be sold and you know sells at the market for 50% of the lithium carbon equivalent price. So in rare earth it's even more of a problem if you make a product that you know that you can't make into a metal alloy. Nobody wants it there. It's you know you're the demand for that is just doesn't exist. So technically you have to make sure you those people that are doing it have that downstream ability more so than the mining ability because the mining ability is not not the risk. >> Yeah. And is that only true for the states again I'm thinking or is it something that we see in we haven't even talked about Europe like we touched upon Canada as well but >> global that's a global thing because if you look at the you know the the the mining part of it I mean uh it's not so much China that's that dominates the mining supply what they dominate is in the processing of many critical minerals uh like even gold China is a big producer in gold But you know I'm hardressed to name a mine that produces gold in China because there's a lot of little things that you know they just say you know they'll they'll it's uneconomic but you know what's cheaper making it there or buying it from overseas that we might get a tariff on or something like that or just making it at home. So they get the most use out of their land but it's not none of their land is arable in terms of agriculture but a lot of they don't have the mineral endowment uh in all the minerals that they need uh just like Japan. Uh so they build up processing capacity. >> Yeah. I um I always like these news articles where it's like China found a 7 trillion gold deposit and you know they drilled a hole here and then they drilled another hole 2 km away. kilometers away and it's a resource. Yeah. Yeah. I And then that's probably like a nuance to say, okay, this might make the gold price cheaper that day and we're just going to buy some gold. >> Um but I mean if you look at infrastructurally uh what they're doing in Brazil, like with all the tariffs and people sort of siding with one or siding with the other, whether it's the West or China or let's break up the West, whether it's Europe, the US or China. um you know chi u China's building or renovating port facilities in Brazil and also in Peru uh to get around going through the Pan the Panama Canal. Um and so they're building out all that infrastructure not only for agriculture but also for minerals any kind of resource >> uh to make it easier for themselves. Um because now they're not getting let's say canola or soy or whatever from the normal sources that they would get it from the US. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, we haven't really talked much about silver, but I see silver being mentioned as as one of those critical minerals a lot. And then I'm kind of split on silver. I'm sure that's going to get me a bunch of love online saying it, but uh yeah, what's uh what's going on there? I mean, year to date, it's actually outperforming gold. It's almost $40 now an ounce. Is it time for a breeder there? Is it a completely different story related to what we're talking about here? Where do you see that fitting? >> Well, silver for me is more of an equity thing uh on the actual uh producing side uh and exploration development because of the geopolitical risk of operating in Mexico and the time frames to permit develop in uh Peru. um which are two big producers of silver. If you're looking for silver dominant plays outside of those jurisdictions that that have at least 40% of institute value in silver, it's hard. It's very hard. And so those ones tend to get now looked at. And so when I talk about silver exposure, I'm not talking about Peru. I'm not talking about Mexico. I'm talking about Argentina. And I'm talking about southern Chile. But those are hard to find. Uh, you know, um, it's hard to find those kind of silver plays outside of these jurisdictions. Uh, and so that's the nuance for me. So my thing is like, yeah, silver exposure is good. Yeah, silver price is good. It's going up. Uh, but I'm I'm less about the silver price than the supply of silver >> and and looking at the constraints of that. >> That's not a problem in gold. It is a problem in silver I think because all the expiration that's not happening in Mexico will have an impact on silver going forward. >> At the same time though I think about geologically as well because you're mentioning the equities here and so is it really responsible to bet on silver alone and look for pure play silver names of which again there are very few out there. So how do how do you even >> especially outside of Peru and outside of Mexico? Yeah, >> you know, uh, most of the silver M&A that we've seen have been people have been companies that already operate in Mexico and are willing to increase their exposure to Mexico and they're mostly underground. Um, we've seen a lot of that kind of M&A, but we haven't seen people from outside coming in to say, "Hey, I want to gain Mexican silver exposure." We don't see that. Yeah, not a lot of companies wanting to gain Mexican exposure as a whole, not only silver, I think. Um, what do you make of that situation there? And and there was just recently a deal related to it. Uh, I suppose to the conversation here, but mineral Alamos. Um, what do you make >> going outside and buying stuff in Nevada? >> Yeah. But but look at Discovery Silver big lowgrade open pit deposit in Mexico that they just basically said to themselves this will never happen. So they went out and bought an asset from the asset sale Numont was doing. management have much more intellectual property uh proprietal knowledge of that part of the world because Tony Makuch you know lives in Timonss in that u and so they bought a project there and Discovery Silver just completely changed pivoted you know 180 from silver open pit lowgrade Mexico to you know moderate grade let's say over a gram uh open pit in Ontario and those deposits have been doing well um you know in terms of generating cash flow for your agos uh and people like that uh so uh that that's been good and so their their share price and their valuation has done very well not because of Mexico because they pivoted and that's probably a little bit of what Minera Alamos is thinking uh I mean Torx is sort of maybe a bit handcuffed in Guerrero uh but their idea of probably diversifying is staying in Mexico But going out of the state of Guerrero, which is problematic in itself, uh even in Mexico, um that's even worse. Uh I mean, just security-wise, because not only in Mexico do we have to deal with, you know, the left-wing government, which is Morena, which has 70% of popularity in the country. So, they're not going anywhere. They're changing the judges uh as well. Uh and that's that's a big deal. um they're they're the expiration is not possible there. Uh but what Torx has done is they you know bought a company like uh prime was it prime mining or something like that. Um but that's an open pit heap leech project. So I don't know when that will get permitted under this current administration but in terms of getting land it's hard to get new ground and so they picked up rain of silver for not too much money to get a bigger land package. Uh we've seen that same thing like I said with West and Angus Gold or something that they picked up that property just for land. >> Yeah. >> Uh to get more uh exposure to land because everything's tightening as well with respect to people wanting ground in that part of Ontario. >> But so not yet time to get contrarian on Mexico. You think it's too early? >> Uh I'm not doing that. Yeah, other people might. Uh I'm not there yet. Uh I mean you know but but know the nuance here is that probably underground development in good states in Mexico could still happen with the government the local government supporting you. Um but open pits uh even though there is not an official ban on it uh uh yeah I wouldn't do it. Uh and also exploration is a nightmare there >> and that that's across states or because I do know that state it is also state dependent and again there's cartel stuff that you have to pay attention >> well that's the other part of it is that extra cost of dealing with the cartels uh you know whether it's a truck or whether it's paying them off or the risk of your concentrate not making it uh to the plant >> you know uh that's another thing that still happens there and so that risk exists as well. >> So for me personally, I'm I'm not into that. >> Yeah. What do you anything else in in South America though that you're paying attention to? There's a a private company actually that crossed my desk recently in Uruguay of all places. First time I'm >> really looking into it from the perspective of mineral exploration. Anything interesting like that that's crossing your desk? Yeah, I'm I'm I'm I'm not too keen on on on going out of jurisdictions that I like. Uh you know, just because I mean that's usually what happens in a bull market is the money starts going to riskier place >> uh you know uh you know but the problem is when the money comes back those are the first things to get cut again. So if your cycle in terms of discovery and that overlaps, you know, there'll be a point where that thing won't get funded anymore >> unless there's deep pockets or it's an exceptional asset. Uh, you know, or a management team has, you know, has has their fingers in a lot of people's, uh, capital pockets. Let's just say, uh, you know, that could work. >> Uh, but, you know, jurisdictionally, Africa, you know, uh, is still in this environment. West Africa is not easy but you know there's companies like Montage Gold developing there that have done well uh you know um but definitely others have done not done as well as others have done uh in terms of development uh assets um you know I I think Namibia as a jurisdiction looks very good but then I just saw a recent article that the government wanted to take a bigger chunk out of the assets uh which you know that's the problem with this kind of environment when everyone one sees the commodity prices going up, they want a bigger take. The problem is is when they want that, then the expiration acts that it it it acts quickest. So that money just doesn't get allocated to your place a lot quicker than, you know, than any other capital, you know. Uh so that that that can become a risk as people look, oh, hey, you know, look at the gold price going up, look at the copper price going up, maybe we should try and get a bigger piece of this pie. um you know so that's that's that can be a problem especially with jurisdictions that you know uh are you know not as well developed uh that are looking uh as that asset as a cash cow like like Panama was with uh Cobra Panama and then you know locally they didn't want the project it was too big of a proportion of the GDP you know uh >> their problem was calling it CBRE Panama should have called it Cobra Peru and it would have been all safe, I think. >> Or they could have called it, you know, just Panama and >> that's what it ended up being. So, in the end, but um >> yeah, >> so I'm writing down no Cuba exploration for Joe yet. Um >> well, I've always had a problem with the Caribbean. I mean, not to go on vacation, but just in terms of developing projects there or Central America, uh, you know, burned in Guatemala and, you know, water's an issue in a lot of these islands. And so to build a big copper plant and then have, you know, the water being, you know, diverted to the plant versus use, you know, that could be an issue. Uh, so u not too keen, not too keen on that part of the world. Vacation though, you're still okay with that? I'm gonna write. >> Yeah, vacation fine. >> Okay. >> Vacation fine. There's plenty of water for a couple weeks. Yeah. >> Well, talking about uh overperformance, platinum has actually beaten gold and silver on uh both year to date and year on year. What's um do you have a take on that? Is that something you you would typically follow or do you mostly stay away? No, I' i've got some PGE exposure uh in Brazil. Uh but more on platium over platinum over nickel. Uh so yeah. No, I and and those are options where you just hold because you don't know which one's going to go up. Uh and because it's uh you know multiple commodities. Uh but jurisdictionally it's a good spot in Brazil. Infrastructurally they've got power and and water and blah blah blah. So I can hold it for that. good people access to capital and so the platinum price has gone up. They've done well on that, but they're more palladium. And so what we have to understand with platinum is cumulative deficits. Uh and people are, you know, realizing the cumulative deficits. And so the price has gone up because of those deficits. But there's a there's a substitution issue with platinum and palladium. And platinum got higher demand because the palladium price had run up several years ago. But now the palladium price has come back such that I believe that palladium project that uh that a South African company had in um in uh in northern Ontario got shut down I believe or it was going to go on care and maintenance. I don't know if that happened but that's where palladium prices got down to. So some of the more marginal projects were getting pulled back just like nickel was happening. Um so but there could be some substitution there and so that could bring palladium back as well and these markets can be you know uh shifted pretty easily on scrap supply you know or the lack of um uh but I'm sure the cumulative deficits in platinum has been underpinning why platinum's done well uh and PGs as a whole um it it very highly linked to uh vehicle sales and not vehicle sales of EVs but more vehicle sales of uh just uh internal combustion engines and hybrids. >> I I I really don't have much to ask about that there specifically that dynamic platinum and palladium because it's also so hard to play it though, right? I mean, it's just so concentrated. I don't even >> palladium you go Russia or platinum you go South Africa and that never works. And we've had that argument about, hey, find something outside of these jurisdictions and you'll you know, you'll you'll mint money. um has never happened. Uh uh but potentially under now under the current uh you know supply chain risk issues, tariffs and that uh it it might be more of a concern. >> Yeah, I just mostly uh mostly have ignored it over the last like couple of years, two three years, something like that maybe too because uh again yeah finding no no decent riskreward exposure for myself there. Um, I forgot to ask something about silver, but Abra silver, I remember when it used to be called Abra Plata. So, I know you you like it since then essentially. Uh, you still like it. >> We've we've had it for a while and uh it's done very well. It was it continues to be a topic. Uh, and this is a development play. Uh, they put out a new resource. uh but they would fall into that uh Ricky RIGI plan uh in Argentina in terms of an investment of I think about 500 million um because of all the lithium projects there in that part of Argentina in Salta on the Altip Plano there. U you know there's more infrastructure and the road that I used to drive to get there back in the '90s used to take about 12 hours. Now it takes about six. Um, and there's a lot more power uh possibilities for them uh because of all the infrastructure built out uh with lithium over the last couple of decades. Uh and so that place looks a lot more doable than it ever has. Um and when Bareric used to have it, it was metallurgically I had it in my head it was a metallergically problematic deposit because they were trying to heat leach it because gold price was $250 an ounce and that kind of grade didn't make sense then. But now where silver and gold is now, milling it, getting better recoveries makes sense. And so metallergy isn't the issue. Their bigger constraint on the 9,000 ton per day plant is water, but they continually looking for new water. U so there's an opportunity there to increase capacity as well if they can get the uh the water going. >> Is how much more upside do you think there is in um in Aber here? I mean, it's was it a billion dollar market cap company right now? >> Yeah. Well, I mean, the thing is that you could say that about Agniko, you know, that's a big project, a big company, you know, and and that's the one that keeps going up because people see something like silver and they go, I don't want Mexico maybe, and I don't want Peru because it takes forever. I want some place in a good jurisdiction. How many choices do I have? And I want a takeout in a place that can get permitted, blah, blah, blah. How many choices do I have? And you know that project uh you won't have a problem getting permitted. Uh that project will probably not have a permit a problem getting funded now because now with the REI they can repatriate money now whereas before they couldn't and because you couldn't repatriate money you couldn't get normal debt funding for that kind of a project >> in Argentina. Now you can um but I I'm thinking it's going to be more of a takeout target, but they've built up the team to build it themselves. You know, it's not an overly complicated uh project. It's mostly open pit, you know, stripping and uh you know, just milling. >> Who do you think uh takes it out? Who do you see this asset fitting with though? >> H it could be anybody. I mean, anybody that's got too much exposure to countries they don't want to be in. uh uh because I mean like you said it's not a small market cap so you know recently we saw Pan-American buy by by MAG uh so how long does that take them to absorb that project and a lot of silver companies like Kor uh they also bought I believe into Mexico we have um uh god who first majestic doubling down on Mexico as well with gatos uh and so uh it might be a company that's looking at this uh uh like another silver play that wants to be bigger. It might be like a combination uh where somebody's already producing and they want a development growth project and you know you take shares uh and uh you know now they have cash flow so their cost of capital is cheaper, easier to build the project and so it might be something like that. There's more of those companies out there. >> Yeah, there's a couple of smaller companies in Argentina too. Is that something you feel comfortable talking about as well? Like Al Baron for example, uh company? >> Well, smaller, but I mean it's a big project. Uh and it's good people that have worked in Argentina for a while or that part of the world. I've known John Black for almost 25, 30 years. Uh and Kevin Heather. So technically, you got some of the best people out there. Um, Altar has been around since I'd been in Argentina in the in the 90s. Uh, it's an open pit. Uh, so that's the proposal. It's doesn't need a tunnel or anything like that. Uh, it's it's uh, yeah, it won't be a small capital project. So, I, you know, they're not going to build it. Um, I I will know more about that because I'm doing a trip down to Chile and Argentina in October for this conference called Latin Rocks, which is a technical conference. I'll go see an operating mine called Caserones, which Londinine Mining is operating in northern Chile. I'll see ATEX uh in uh in Chile with their valoraniano project and then I'll see Alderbron as well. So, I have a better idea what's happening with these copper uh plays down there right now. >> Yeah. What about some of the really small names in in Argentina? I mean, um what used to be called Pampa Metals, it's Andina, right now they >> Yeah. Now they got a project in Peru as well. Oh, no. In Colombia. In Colombia. Yeah. Uh so, um yeah, I mean I I think Argentina is a great place to be if you're in the right provinces and they are in San Juan. Uh uh Colombia can be problematic. Uh but um you know I I the gold guys seem to be doing well in Colombia. Um uh and I know of a private company there that uh I might visit in November that's doing very well and staying private. Uh because that usually works for these kind of jurisdictions to just stay private. Uh but yeah, I Colombia might be turning cuz I think B2 Gold is looking with a harder lens at developing Grandma Latte, uh which has been on the shelf for a long time. Uh so yeah, let's see what happens in Colombia. >> Yeah, Colombia is is is geologically interesting, I think, um politically and also from the perspective of organized crime, not as easy, but also not not impossible either. again if you're in the right spot. >> I mean, but that issue of crime uh is is now all the way from Peru, uh Ecuador, and Colombia. Uh and and we're we're talking about um what they call artisanal miners, which are not artisanal miners. They're more like criminal gangs, and they just go and mine with no permitting, no nothing. They've just made an agreement with the locals. They're paying them uh to mine there. And sometimes they don't pay and then the locals get OMAD. And um you have incidents in Colombia like what happened in Baritica uh you know before when continental gold existed they had those geologists that that uh were were killed murdered basically uh at the Berlin project there. Uh so yeah um security risk as well as jurisdictional risk with respect to permitting and NOS's there in some of these jurisdictions. >> Yeah. Well, while on the topic of South America, we might do a bit of a soft pivot here, if you will, and talk about lithium because a lot of it comes from South America. Lithium is up almost what 50% in like 2 months or something like that. What's your take? Is this a sustainable bull market now or is it a speculation based? Is, >> you know, are the guys down in South America going to, you know, turn on production a bit more and then crash the price? Where do you see it going? Well, you you have, you know, the issue with probably a lot of development not happening, especially in Western Australia. Uh, so you're not getting a lot of that spamine concentrate going to China anymore. Uh so and you know not a lot of new development projects in spamine and spoimeine on the cost curve is probably uh on the higher end uh because of all the infrastructure required because you're taking a rock that's uh let's say got 1 to 1.5% uh lithium oxide and you want to concentrate it as 5 1/2%. So terms of concentration it's not much concentration. It's not like a a copper project where you're taking less than 1% and making it into 25% you know. So tonnage wise and what you're shipping is a lot less. Not the case in lithium. Uh so you need that infrastructure. Uh and then where does that infrastructure go to? Do you build a processing plant there? And what are you shipping? Uh so are you shipping all of that lithium concentrate at 5 a 12% all the way to China which might cost you a bit. um you know there's less interest in lithium uh just right now with respect to car companies especially so there's a lot of talk about Ford you know helping out with this plant in Canada and then building up but but the US companies the US car companies especially uh they don't see much growth in EV demand in the states and so they're not putting a lot of money into that the money is really coming from China uh and maybe Europe uh but it's not it's not the US. So yes, on the lower end of the cost curve is probably brines. Uh but they're constrained in terms of how many brines there are out there. Uh but they're also techn technological changes both on the supply side and the demand side. So on the demand side, you know, if we could figure out direct lithium extraction, which I think is going commercial with a French guy, French company in Argentina, but that's nuance. So every brine is different in terms of how you would apply this direct lithium extraction. And then also looking at brines like with the oil companies and looking at a different method of potentially and if that works, then there'll be an over supply of lithium potentially. And then on the supply side, I still think lithium is required for most of these batteries. But we've seen before that when uh when the engineers see a commodity that might be problematic in terms of supply and the supply chain, they engineer a way out of it. So one of that is sodium uh which the Chinese are developing uh and that's going up its own density and now getting to uh getting to where lithium batteries are. So could we see that you know coming in and then reducing the ban for lithium? So technically I you know I I don't play the lithium market directly. I play it indirectly with expiration on a multicommodi you know prospect generator that just did a deal with Riointo on lithium. Let let the major spend the money on lithium cuz you're not going to get it from the market. >> You know if you're just a lithium plane you're a junior. It's very hard to extract that money from the market at at current times. >> Is it too early for DA plays though? I mean, I've seen a couple of those floating around, but it's again proving it up at a commercial scale seems like it's could be the bottleneck there. So, what do you Yeah. How do you even play that whole thematic? >> Well, it's very hard. I mean, the thing is that you have to be so confident that the technical team on those projects know what they're doing. uh at commercial scale uh because you know it's just coming into play on one specific brine in northwest Argentina. But uh it but it just because it works there doesn't mean that you could take it and make it work everywhere. It's very similar to uh to uh the Newton process in terms of leeching uh sulfides uh and trying to get an 80% recovery on these things and producing cathode is that it doesn't work for every project. You know the bugs need a certain kind of environment. They need a certain type of mineralization just like that those molecules and that that they needs a certain kind of nuance uh to get the kind of economic recovery that you need and every play will be a bit different. >> So what do you did you have lithium exposure yourself right now? Yeah, like I said, it's indirect with a prospect generator that does multiple commodities that they do gold, they do they do uh spaine, uh lithium, and they also do nickel and other things that Quebec's known for, but it's not like at one point most of their valuation might have been on the nickel package that they had. Then it went down and now they've gone back to gold, but they also got some antimony and so it's gone up on that and it's it's so those sort of plays it's nice to have a little bit of a multicommodity exposure and so they can reallocate capital to say okay the market will give us money to explore for lithium. Okay, they won't now. Okay, but they will give us money to explore for antimony, you know. So so you can constantly raise money but the thematic is different. >> Yeah, but but no, that's what I meant. No, no direct exposure though. Like it's not a name that you're like, "Oh, lithium's going up. I'm going to buy specifically." >> No. No. Because technically, for the reasons I explained on the supply and demand side, there's too much risk. >> Yeah. >> Or uncertainty, which is the same thing. >> Yeah. No, that's fair. Well, what does your portfolio look like in total? Like, do you have maybe an overview or whatever from the perspective of the underlying metals? Do you have most experience? >> Yeah, I would say you know in terms of stage most of them are non-cash flowing except for one royalty generator that's cash flowing and most of the other guys uh don't produce cash but I would say more exploration than development but we do have some development plays and they're doing well uh which is not always a good market uh the orphan period. Um, also jurisdictionally, uh, like I said, Argentina, Chile, uh, uh, the States cuz I'm looking for that, um, you know, ability to permit and domestic production, a bit of a bit of the Yukon, but infrastructurally not as challenged as some other projects. Finland, as we talked about, Australia. Uh so that that's sort of like the and and Kazakhstan is sort of like a uh a nuanced exposure to a potentially a little bit riskier jurisdiction but infrastructurally great doesn't need a lot of uh grade to make it work there not a lot of u impediments with respect to permitting uh and they do have uh downstream facilities to treat copper uh so you know so that sort of uh exposure and then in terms of commodities uh you know copper gold, copper, silver, and uh um like I said with respect to lithium and antimony, those are in some of the plays but are not direct. It's not 100% antimony. It's not 100% lithium. It's part of the main product. Uh and uh and also a rare earth one as well. >> Oh, that's the Brazil exposure, I suppose. or >> yeah, Brazil, Chile, and uh trying to get into the states with a processing plant. >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Oh, that's going to be an interesting one. I think that's going to take some time to build as well, those are very long-term investments and uh that'll be interesting to talk about as well. >> Yeah. But I mean, they're really I mean, it's all technical. Uh but if you can contract the permitting timeline, which is what they're trying to do, uh the more thing the more important thing is technically can they make it commercial? Mhm. >> That's more of the risk than I think permitting or potentially funding right now. uh it's trying to make that gap up because when China was coming up they borrowed so whatever uh a lot of the technical capacity intellectual propriety of of the west whether it's Europe or other parts Australia the states or wherever right now because of the way the US Europe want to do it or anybody or Australia they're leaving the Chinese out of it >> so they have to jump that gap quicker in terms of getting to where the Chinese are because the Chinese it's not just it's for those people that just think it's cheap labor it's not that. Go read that book uh called um Apple in China. It tells you how how big of an impact Apple had on the engineering uh you know in China that you know accelerated their ability to manufacture and that bleeds into everything and their ability I mean smelting technology you know processing rare earths or antimony ox you know they just they have all of it. >> Mhm. Uh, and it's not just cheap labor, it's technical capacity. They have it and they can do it better than anybody. Um, and so now we have to, uh, you know, jump that gap and the amount of people that understand how to bridge that gap, uh, there's not a lot of people like that out there. And so, uh, you're not going to flood the market in terms of the technical capacity to do rare earths or some of these other critical minerals in terms of processing. Yeah, it feels like that's a a whole podcast episode in and of itself. And I'm totally not saying this because I'm way out of my depth here and I have no questions to ask, but let let's table that for another time. What do you think is the biggest risk here for juniors though, Joe? What do what do you think? Yeah. Is it is it a broad deleveraging event as they call it? Is it, you know, higher for longer type of thing? Interest rates? Is it lower commodity prices? What do you Yeah. What's the biggest risk here? >> Well, their biggest risk is raising money. And so all the risks about going to the market, is there a market? It will always be their issue and they will always and understandably have it in their mindset that um you know we better take as much as we can now uh because we don't know if it's going to be there next year. And so what I see a lot of people trying to do is you know back in you know maybe 10 or 20 years ago people would raise for the next season. you know, they would go to your roundup, they would go to Pedak, they would go to these conferences with the idea of selling their wares and saying, "Oh, look, this is what we have. We're going to raise some money, blah, blah, blah, and then here's the field season." But now, what they're tending to do is because sometimes when they get to that conference, the money's not there, but they still have the field season to come. Canada's got that advantage of flow through where you can attract capital that's not interested in your project, not interested in you, but they just want the tax break. Um, not everyone has that jurisdictional advantage for capital. Uh, so they tend to raise for two years. They go, well, in that two years, hopefully I'll hit a good intersection that I could come back to the market and raise more money at a premium. Um and and that sort of habit I think is is running because one of my companies they working capital wise they were fine. They had a fully funded permitting uh I mean project a drilling program uh to the end of the season but like I said when the ducks are quacking you can raise some more money and now you've pushed your funding for another 12 to 18 months that you can talk to people but you don't need their money. >> Mhm. uh you know uh that's a much better conversation. Goes, "Oh, how much money you have?" Yeah, we don't need money. We just need people to buy our shares, you know. Uh and and that's what I want. That's what I want. Uh but constantly raising it at a higher price, not issuing a lot of dilutive warrants that are long-term, uh you know, that are full. Uh you know, that sort of stuff sort of says something uh to me. uh unless it's like one of these companies that's just like an advertising like hey look look at me I'm here you know because the US uh a lot of the retail now the high net worth is a very important demand set especially for people in low juris low-risisk jurisdictions uh and so if you're in the US you need to get exposure to that high net worth uh audience uh and you will go out of your way to you know to, you know, talk to people, pay people that would get you that exposure because those people have a lot of capital. And you know, another source of funding that the juniors may not get exposed to is this private funding of what venture capital funding coming out of Silicon Valley. That's they understand the issue because because of artificial intelligence and everything they're doing electric vehicles all need these kind of minerals need copper need this but they're not seeing like oh my god it's going to take 30 years for this project you know whatever they're saying okay we're going to do it like we're smarter than you we've got artificial intelligence blah blah blah we're going to contract this down to like five to 10 years like this one company saying oh give me venture capitalists. We're going to use AI and all this other stuff. We've got 10 projects. Our goal is 10 projects in 10 years. >> Good luck. They're in the States. Uh but they're not looking for retail. They're not looking for, you know, big resource equity funds, nothing like that. They're looking at venture capitalists that have funded companies like PayPal, like Tesla, like uh Palunteer, and that's where they made their money. And so for them to drop $20 million on this project or company is not a big deal for them. Uh but you know if you compare that for a junior company that's a big deal. >> Yeah. Uh but these guys can stay private and so their lan curve looks much different because they stay private through the entire cycle almost and their IPO would be hey we're in production >> you know so it's a much different audience and they've been doing a conference now it's on its third year and as I've been looking at a lot of the new technology and exploration and uh processing and getting around and and the uh the adaptation of AI uh I mean, that's another source of funding that that can be significant, but I don't know if it's a source of funding for juniors because they're not attracted to the junior uh concept. They're attracted to the application of technologies that they've invested in to solve this problem. Cuz if you read the book about Apple and China, these sort of companies and these venture capitalists see an issue and they run towards it. There's a technical gap here that we have to solve. We'll solve it. Whereas mining tends to be, oh, oh my god, that's a high-risisk technical issue. We want offtheshelf technology. So, we're more reluctant to take that risk because we're taking all this other risk, jurisdictional risk, drill bit risk, you know, financing risk and all this other st. We don't want another risk by saying we're going to use we're going to, you know, we're going to do a new sort of metallurgical uh uh process or we're going to do a new drilling method or something like that. They they don't want to put that in because the investors won't be interested in that. Whereas these guys, the venture capitalists in the states, that's that's what they're keen on. That's what they want. If you're not applying these technologies to this problem, then they're not investing in you. That that's that too actually is a topic that could be a podcast in and of itself specifically about do you stay private, how long do you stay private for, should should juniors even be public in the first place and stuff like that. Something >> well like Colombian company I'm talking about, they've attracted uh fund funding from big institutional like like Black Rockck uh and they've got a joint venture with a big major and so moneywise they don't need it. So, if you don't need the public markets, uh, you'll avoid them because why bother doing financials every quarter? Why bother putting out news releases? Why bother doing all this other stuff when you could just keep it private? You'll always have money. >> Yeah. >> And uh, you could take risks, you know, like, okay, let's drill these holes over here. Oh, we didn't hit. Okay, but your share price isn't going to go down 50% tomorrow. So it's essentially you want to give your money to the companies that don't want your money at all. >> Yes. That's the point in all of this is it's those people that don't need you that you should be attracted to. >> You don't want those people coming on bended knee. >> Yeah. Exactly. When's uh when's Exploration Insights going public? >> Yeah. No. >> No. That's a good answer. No. No, I mean what we uh thrive what I continue to thrive to to do uh in terms of goal is stay independent uh you know uh and uh have that technical bias uh uh in terms of what we do uh and and and so we built a little room here for ourselves. uh we don't go out to uh we we don't have a huge audience in terms of uh subscribers like some other people but our subscribers are pretty uh nuanced in themselves. They they ask a lot of questions and uh you know they they won't get fooled and so all the work I do is to make sure I don't embarrass myself in front of them. >> Yeah, that's a it's a good way of putting it and that's exploration insights. I think that's actually a bit of a mic drop moment so I might as well cut it here. Anything else that you think I'm forgetting to ask you though in the conversation today? >> No, I think we covered a lot and I appreciate that we went on in all these different little webs. >> Appreciate it as well. Always a pleasure. Not three hours this time, but that gives us uh reason to do this sooner rather than later. So, I'm really looking forward to to our next conversation. But thank you so much for doing this today. >> All right. Thank you very much, Antonia. Cheers.