@readyaimfirethe stock split idea is probably one of the most...

@readyaimfire

the stock split idea is probably one of the most stupid and ridiculous things you've said while servicing the forum with your painfully repetitive, disingenuous low-info sniping.

The issue is simply derisking: confirmation of scale with further drilling, confirmation of viability of the Renard strategy, studies need to be completed (there isn't even a PEA yet), and confirmation that infrastructure (ie road) will be completed within a predictable timeframe.

The main reason WR1 has outperformed the sector out of the bottom in Feb is the promise of the Renard option, which effectively nullifies the far greater risks of permitting time, and capex costs (and capex inflation) which may have meant the project would be unable to attract financing in the current market.

Everyone seems to understand the Renard strategy is a go, and that the greenfield vs brownfield study isn't so much about driving decision-making as showing the market how much project economics are improved by this approach.

WR1 suddenly has a far shorter and easier path to production -- and this is solely because management had the experience, technical knowledge and vision to recognise the opportunity presented by the sale of Renard.

Although interest from strategic partners has understandably intensified, institutional investors buying on market will likely want to see some more boxes ticked. (We should however note there is some opacity in terms of who the existing beneficial T20 holders actually are.)