Moin joey,
I don't think that's necessary. The board certainly knows how to judge the situation better than I do with my modest knowledge.I just like to puzzle and with my previous post I would like to comment on a different view of the recent events small activation partial amount ATM & insider buying.In part, the ATM activation of Mo. was portrayed here as deliberate misdirection. For me, it was a completely normal process in the course of the GM event with the usual positive marketing, but no earth-shattering news on Friday and subsequent sale on Mon. Quasi a non-event (also shareprice-wise), as we all know the ATM conditions. However, I wondered about the specific amount, which for me rather indicates an earmarking (possible legal costs, rubber boats or barbecue for employees
) outside the usual OPEX.
If I am correct in my assessment of the political situation, we have on the one hand the 7% agreed with the provincial government and on the other hand the 5% ceiling set at national level. That correlates.Unfortunately I can't find the quote, but I'm sure that the governor of Catamarca, Raoul Jalil, said before the RIGI amendment decisions that he didn't like the 5% regulation. Incidentally, even after the approval of the RIGI, I have not heard anything new from him in this regard.Another indication that the situation is a bit muddled. It's actually typical of Argentina, with a strong federal system (the governors are little kings), in which the state tries to gain more influence. Sorry, I can't help it, a little background knowledge. Before the change to the RIGI with the 5%, the greedy governor had demanded a 15% fee from the province of San Juan! As this would have completely undermined the objectives of the RIGI, the "Solomonic" 5% regulation came about.
It is not without a certain humour for me that in the case of Galan/Catamarca a small blockade has been created by federal government influence.Of course, this can be solved with a little creativity. For example: the agreement between Galan & Catamarca is cancelled by mutual agreement, Catamarca declares its participation in the RIGI, Galan declares its participation in the RIGI, a "voluntary", non-binding payment of 2% for "charitable purposes" is agreed.Non-commitment or flexibility would reduce Galan's risk of paying higher fees than competitors who also want to take the lithium chloride route in the future, such as Ganfeng in the province of Salta.
Considering the above as a possible option, the vague statements or silence on the RIGI, export licence, offtake partner seem plausible to me.What else could JP have said without snubbing the provincial governor?If even insider purchases/trades are repeatedly portrayed as bad investments in an "moneyinvest"
manner here in the forum, then I don't want to know what would have happened if he had said: "We are leaning towards cancelling the agreement with Catamarca...!"
FIRE FREE HOTCOPPERS!
(20min delay)