AZL General Discussion, page-21437

Paul is not really a problem. If his leadership was a hindrance, I'd be calling for a vote of no confidence. The acquisition of Prairie was a master stroke, which got us investing on AZL. That was Paul's doing. Five credit when credit is due, it has turned AZL around.. and others need to see it, like a different company, almost.. different project.

There is no inherent problem Prairie project is facing, simply time it takes to progress the project and delay issues are common.

Can we trust the project to reach production? Yes. It has backing from all levels of Government, construction supply chain are at Saskatchewan's fingertips, and pilot plant has/is showing it can be done albeit not yet at scale. Can we trust the project will be in production by Q1 2025? Sure. But it would be wise not to based on every mining project progress, things don't always fall into place except perhaps with a bit of luck.

Prairie project doesn't have any headwinds as far as I'm concerned. In fact the opposite! Permitting issues Big Sandy is facing, all others are facing too. So the great and mighty US industries are looking for other countries to provide raw material supply, and thanks to NAFTA and IRA, Mexico and Canada stands to benefit. Further Exxon Lithium has just been announced, so the confidence and sentiment of North America towards DLE along with peer projects to Exxon eg. Prairie Lithium, stands to benefit - this is in part why the announcement last week was important. Not everyone is able to tap into Exxon's investment, they don't need help with funding capex... but make no mistake, Americans are on the hunt for future lithium supply, Europe too.

The gambit is the promised commercial scale production in 2025. Arizona Lithium stand to benefit from the limited supply available based on forecasted future demand. Further, it's all about the least cost possible and Paul is aware and already capitalising on that based on PFS, as you'd most likely have heard or will hear him and his narrative/rhetoric.

My beef, and it's not really Paul per se but Big Sandy, is that we need to get over the fact that Big Sandy is no longer flagship. See it more as cherry on top. Having it mentioned time and again only creates uncertainties. Investors hate uncertainties or allergic to it most of all and always top of mind of all.