Ann: Binding Offtake Agreement Signed with Renault, page-28

Honestly, these 'BINDING OFFTAKES' for Vulcan are a bit fluffy, in my opinion. Some posters point to them as some form of validation of the business case, as though these OEM's have done deep due diligence and therefore Vulcan is certainly going to be a success. However if you step back and engage the rational part of your brain, it's actually anything but that. Ignore all the people saying "boom!" and think about it a little longer.

Yes, in many cases, binding offtakes are indeed great validation - when there's a strong DFS in place, holes have been drilled, pilot plants in production, funding conversations being held with bondholders, strategic partners, and so on. Having an OEM agree to purchase end product is an absolute weapon when it comes to getting finance over the line. However in Vulcan's case any rationale person can see that this is still 'pie in the sky'. At PFS stage, however good your PFS is, it's still just a project on paper. Sure, the project might indeed come off fantastically well (nobody can tell yet until they at least start trying to drill holes), but right now these offtakes mean nothing given the condition precedent is "Vulcan actually have to get into production". There is no risk for these OEM's to sign up, because if the project doesn't come off then the deal lapses. It is 100% in the interests of the OEM's to sign up as many of these offtakes as they can [theoretically] financially support, in order to guarantee their own future security of supply. But don't mistake this as meaning Renault are 100% certain this will get into production. If that was the case, why the condition precedent? These announcements double as a PR win for the OEM: "look, shareholders and media, we're moving into the future too!" etc.

Feel free to write off the above view as "paid downramper", "shorter" and all the other usual rubbish if you can't handle a contrary view - but I don't think it's an unfair observation.