Group 1 - The U.S. government has been pursuing deep-sea mining since the 1970s, aiming to expand its influence and control over international seabed resources [1][3] - The Trump administration intensified the focus on "critical minerals," implementing policies to protect the supply chain for key minerals essential for manufacturing and military industries [3][4] - The U.S. has significant deep-sea mineral resources, estimated at over 1 billion tons of polymetallic nodules, which contain essential materials for high-tech products [6][4] Group 2 - The current U.S. administration's push for deep-sea mining reflects a broader strategy to bypass international laws and regulations, aiming to secure critical resource control [9][7] - Environmental experts criticize the U.S. government's actions as reckless and irresponsible, highlighting the potential ecological damage and long recovery times for deep-sea ecosystems [10][12] - The unilateral approach to deep-sea mining raises concerns about the legality and sustainability of such operations, with potential challenges in international recognition and market access for extracted minerals [14][12]

Financial Data and Key Metrics Changes - TMC reported a net loss of approximately $20.6 million or $0.06 per share in Q1 2025, compared to a net loss of $25.2 million or $0.08 per share for the same period in 2024 [37] - Exploration and evaluation expenses for Q1 2025 were $9.5 million, down from $18.1 million in 2024, attributed to lower mining and technological costs [37] - General and administrative expenses increased to $8.5 million in Q1 2025 from $6.6 million in the comparative quarter due to higher share-based compensation [37] - Net cash used in operating activities was $9.3 million in Q1 2025, compared to $11.8 million in 2024, reflecting reduced cash outflows [38] - TMC's liquidity, including cash and borrowing capacity, stood at about $44 million as of March 31, 2025, or $81 million pro forma after a recent direct offering [38] Business Line Data and Key Metrics Changes - The company achieved significant milestones in regulatory applications, including the submission of the world's first application for a commercial recovery permit for deep-sea minerals [11][12] - The company expects to complete its Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) for the commercial recovery area in the next quarter, which will provide new assumptions based on the U.S. permitting strategy [11][31] Market Data and Key Metrics Changes - The U.S. government has shown increased support for deep-sea mining, with recent executive orders aimed at expediting the permitting process and enhancing domestic supply chains for critical minerals [14][17] - The company estimates that its exploration license areas contain over 1.6 billion tons of nodules, with significant quantities of nickel, copper, cobalt, and manganese, which are critical for various industries [13] Company Strategy and Development Direction - TMC is focused on establishing a clear regulatory pathway for deep-sea mining, which is expected to enhance shareholder value and attract investment [5][15] - The company plans to explore alternative financing sources, including U.S. government departments and strategic partners, to prepare for commercial production [10] - TMC aims to maintain a capital-light approach by leveraging partnerships with existing facilities and minimizing upfront capital expenditures [30][34] Management's Comments on Operating Environment and Future Outlook - Management expressed optimism about the regulatory clarity achieved and the potential for significant job creation and economic impact from deep-sea mining [14][19] - The company is encouraged by the level of professionalism and urgency from U.S. agencies regarding the permitting process, which is expected to facilitate timely commercial operations [16][17] - Management highlighted the importance of the U.S. leading in deep-sea mining to secure critical mineral supply chains and reduce reliance on foreign sources [19][24] Other Important Information - TMC has engaged in extensive consultations with NOAA and other U.S. agencies to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and expedite the review process [12][16] - The company has a strong commitment to environmental research and has invested over $200 million in cumulative environmental spending [30] Q&A Session Summary Question: Can you provide more details on the exploration ground and its potential? - Management confirmed that the additional area applied for is complementary to existing concessions and is not claimed by any other sovereign [45][49] Question: What is the expected timeline for the application review process? - Management indicated that they expect to receive feedback from NOAA soon and are in regular contact with the authority [52][53] Question: Are there plans to go downstream in processing? - Management acknowledged the potential for downstream processing and is exploring partnerships while ensuring capital-light operations [59][62] Question: What funding opportunities are being pursued with the U.S. government? - Management is exploring various financial assistance options, including loans and grants, as part of a comprehensive approach to funding [70][71] Question: How will overlapping licenses work with ISA? - Management clarified that TMC is applying only under U.S. regulations and will not apply to ISA for a collection license [76][82] Question: Will there be issues selling metals to ISA member states? - Management does not foresee any issues with potential customers purchasing metals, emphasizing the growing demand for these resources [83]

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is drafting an executive order to allow the U.S. to stockpile metal resources from the Pacific seabed in response to China's dominance in the battery metals and rare earth supply chain, but faces significant challenges [1][3]. Group 1: Challenges of Deep-Sea Mining - There is widespread domestic opposition in the U.S. to deep-sea mining due to environmental concerns, with experts warning that it could cause far greater damage than land mining [5]. - The U.S. lacks the necessary technology and capabilities for deep-sea mining, which involves high costs and complex operations, making it potentially more expensive than importing rare earth materials [5]. - The U.S. faces pressure from the United Nations, as the International Seabed Authority (ISA) has stated that all exploration and mining activities must be regulated by them, and unilateral actions could violate international law [7]. Group 2: Context of Rare Earth Supply Chain - The U.S. is currently highly dependent on China for both raw materials and development technology related to rare earth elements, which poses a risk if China decides to restrict exports [3]. - China has already begun implementing export controls on seven rare earth items in response to U.S. tariffs, highlighting the ongoing tensions in the trade relationship [3].

Core Viewpoint - The Trump administration is drafting an executive order to stockpile metals found on the Pacific seabed to counter China's dominance in battery minerals and rare earth supply chains [1][3]. Group 1: Rare Earth and Metal Supply - The majority of seabed contains polymetallic nodules rich in nickel, cobalt, copper, and manganese, essential for electric vehicle batteries and high-tech products [1]. - China produces 99% of the world's heavy rare earth metals, with a small amount from Vietnam, which has recently closed its refining plant due to tax disputes [1]. - China accounts for approximately 90% of global refined rare earth production, while Japan and Germany produce small quantities but rely on Chinese raw materials [1]. Group 2: Challenges of Deep-Sea Mining - The technology for deep-sea resource development is currently immature, making it difficult to establish stable mining operations on the seabed [3]. - Existing methods for seabed mining, such as constructing human habitats or developing mining robots, face significant cost and technical challenges, limiting large-scale application [3]. - Deep-sea resources have historically served as a supplement to global supply rather than a mainstream source, and there is international opposition to large-scale seabed resource development [3]. Group 3: Regulatory and Environmental Concerns - The International Seabed Authority (ISA) has warned against unilateral actions by the Trump administration regarding seabed mining, emphasizing that all activities must be conducted under ISA's control [5]. - The ISA Secretary-General stated that any unilateral action would violate international law and undermine multilateral principles [5]. - Experts indicate that deep-sea mining could cause environmental damage 25 times greater than land mining, threatening marine biodiversity and habitats [5]. Group 4: Economic Implications - Even if the deep-sea mining plan is successful, the extraction costs may exceed the prices of importing from China, suggesting that the initiative may be more of a market appeasement strategy [7]. - The deep-sea mining plan reflects the weaknesses in the U.S. industrial chain, indicating that external solutions to internal problems may be unrealistic [7]. - The rare earth issue, while a small battleground, holds significant potential to influence broader economic dynamics and the future of U.S. manufacturing revival [7].