Agreement is already implied by the fact that PLL has a 25% interest in SQY, SYA has the voting power by way of their 75% interest.
PLL might refuse to pay their contribution to a carbonate plant however it doesnt exclude them form still having a joint interest in the plant by way of their 25% ownership.
The only way they could do what you suggest is by selling their 25% stake, which still wouldnt stop the priority of the SC6 going to a future carbonate/hydroxide palnt.
I think you are just trying to stir the pot for some reason, whatever floats your boat I guess.
Stop speculating on something you are not qualified on.
Ann: Sayona & Piedmont Formally Approve NAL Restart, page-61
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 184 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add SYA (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
2.3¢ |
Change
-0.001(4.17%) |
Mkt cap ! $236.7M | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| 2.4¢ | 2.5¢ | 2.3¢ | $337.1K | 14.25M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 64 | 14483458 | 2.3¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| 2.4¢ | 5943785 | 11 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 06/09/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| SYA (ASX) Chart |