General Neometals related news, page-2384

"As NMT are a shareholder in HNR it’s not our place to make Announcements re HNR we don’t run that company but clearly benefit should it’s value go up."

Hi Loop, agree with most of what you say but in this case must beg to differ. If there is a material contract that is of benefit to NMT then the market MUST be informed by NMT management. HNR can make there own announcements.

I can only assume that either; 1. There is no contract (which is what I was told by NMT management) or 2. The contract is not "material".

It may be that certain conditions precedent on the Greenhouse/HNR side have not yet been met therefore NMT do not deem that a contract/agreement yet exists - I don't know. Given that we have 100% radio silence from NMT but full disclosure from HNR then that is the best explanation I can come up with.

As for the comment that due to our cross-holding in HNR and Critical we are set to benefit - I suppose that is true, but only to the extent of our shareholding. There is nothing that I have seen to suggest the greenhouse/HNR/critical have some special skills or information that would give them better access to deal flow (i.e. securing battery supply) than Primobius could do in its own right. Primobius have already announced 3 deals - Merc, Stelco, Itochu. HNR have nothing however they are set to become an intermediary in some key markets.

If I were a (direct) HNR holder I would be very happy to have access to this technology but please don't try to convince me that these legacy deals done at a time when battery recycling was a distant opportunity are strategically "good" for NMT. They are a distraction (at best) and potentially a difficult complication in some key European markets in the future. I hope, for example, that we do not end up in dispute with our licence holder if an Italian car maker decides they want to deal directly with Primobius rather that through an intermediary.

Just my opinion.
Cheers,
SC