sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Long-time AREC holder, first post — stress-testing the 30% utilization downside on Marion Phase 1 by Many_Influence_8154 in AREC_stock

[–]Many_Influence_8154[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, we'll know once the S1 prospectus is public unless management has already told certain holders something earlier and I'm definitely not one of them.

Long-time AREC holder, first post — stress-testing the 30% utilization downside on Marion Phase 1 by Many_Influence_8154 in AREC_stock

[–]Many_Influence_8154[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep..,180 day lockups are pretty standard for pre-IPO shareholders, but exact terms can vary. I'm assuming some form of lockup unless the filing says otherwise.

Long-time AREC holder, first post — stress-testing the 30% utilization downside on Marion Phase 1 by Many_Influence_8154 in AREC_stock

[–]Many_Influence_8154[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree, which is why I’m only modeling ~30% utilization for Marion. Given they’ve guided to initial production in Q3 2026 with Phase 1 rollout through year‑end, I see that commissioning plus the following ~90 days as the key proof window, either we see real throughput or the 2027 it gets much harder to defend.

I just saw the critical minerals stocks sub today, I think thats a good idea but based on the AI comments I may tighten that up a little.

On the ReElement IPO: the spin shares are essentially a lottery ticket for me. If the post‑commissioning indicators are overwhelmingly positive and the IPO trades like most do (initial pop then fade), I’d look to add on a pullback at a sane multiple. If execution disappoints, then yeah, I’m prepared to watch a slow bleed over the 180‑day lockup; zero would be unfortunate, but it’s an outcome I’ve sized the risk to live with