ASX Today, page-38254

Not sure what you are comparing, but each 0.1% below or above 6% is worth US$15 per tonne - US$30 per tonne more. So if LTR produces 6% grade concentrate and PLS produces say 5.3% grade theoretically LTR will get anywhere between US$105 - US$210 more per tonne more in price than PLS (assuming all other things are equal).

Furthermore it is about deleterious elements - as many know Greenbushes also produces technical grade spodumene (above 6.5% grade) and that demands much higher prices given some technical grade specifications need to have much lower Fe203 counts than chemical grade applications. CG applications is what you use in EVs, and this TG produced by Greenbushes can be used in the CG market as well, but CG can't be used in certain TG markets - Post #: 71801792

There is a lot of discussion about LTR's underground mining costs - just be mindful that in the underground section of the mine grades are higher, and higher grade means you need to treat less tonnes of ore to get to 6% grade spodumene and that benefits costs as well. So if you are using 1.5% Li20 feedstock, you need 5 tonnes of it at a 80% recovery rate to produce 1 tonne 6% grade spodumene. If the ore graded 1.25%, you need 6 tonnes of it at a 80% recovery rate to produce 1 tonne of 6% grade concentrate. Low deleterious element count and easy liberation also help recovery rates and aid in cost mitigation strategies as well - Post #: 71801792

The higher grade in the underground sections (and ability to produce 6% grade concentrate at a decent recovery rate) is LTR's saving grace when compared to open pit mines that use lower grade feedstock. Obviously production has to show those LTR assumptions are true.

Yes profit is about costs and revenue but there is a huge advantage if you can produce 6% grade spodumene and meet recovery rates of say over 75%.

Anyway, PLS has done well so if LTR can meet its cost targets and recovery rates then LTR will do just as well. Not a competition.

All IMO