Ann: Response to Media Speculation, page-63

I think it's encouraging to see the company reviewing the DFS.

I had seen some fault within the recent one by way of the cut off. Where some companies had their hydrology cut off around 200mg/l of lithium with an average of around 350mg/l or so...

... Galaxy's cut off was 500mg/l with an average of around 750mg/l

That is a significant difference and I was always curious when I considered the lower magnesium content that reduces recovery and increases costs if Galaxy could have reduced their cut off to a much lower threshold.

Company A (the first one) has a higher magnesium cost which pushes them up the cost curve of brine extraction and also reduces their recovery per litre.

Sal De Vida is recognised as one of the lowest magnesium content brines on the planet.

So by comparison just simply, forgetting the magnesium content we have one company that can pull 150mg/l vs one that based on a higher threshold can pull out 250mg/l which is a 66% increase.

...placing them on a side by side comparison with the same cut off would make a significant increase to the amount able to be extracted... A massive decrease to cost and also pond size required.

So Sal De Vida with a cut off down around 200mg/l might show an increased recovery per litre of 366%.

And that's before taking into account the difficulty of seperating/removing the magnesium and other impurities.

Not all brines are equal...

...And not all companies have a cash flow supporting their future plans.

Might be good to hear from you tonight @airconditioner if you're about...