Ann: ASX Release Land Agreement Teeside, page-13

For disclosure purposes I work for PEK and the comments below represent my own personal opinions and are not necessarily those of the company.

I find ausheds comments very vague so for those interested in more detail they should read the White paper on the PEK website www.peakresources.com.au/whitepaper/ and specifically the bench marking exercise in it by Adamas Intelligence which makes an unbias comparison of developing RE companies.  I quote from Adamas, " the Ngualla project ...  is one of just two low-CAPEX rare earth projects outside of China with potential to payback pre-production capital expenses in under three years, and one of just five low-CAPEX projects with potential to payback in less than six years."
Adamas also puts Ngualla ahead on cash cost weighted against NdPr production, operating profit margin, and the proportion of annual production comprised of 'Market-Needed' Rare Earths.

In my opinion Ngualla is easily the best undeveloped rare earth deposit for the following reasons. It's got a high head grade with a good ratio of NdPr. The  resource is big (26+ years initial mine life).  The deposit is at surface so the mining will be straight forward with a low strip ratio. The ore can be beneficiated to a 45% concentrate. (For comparisons purposes I understand from company presentations, LYC ship a 38% concentrate.) Its a bastnaesite which makes it easier (and therefore presumably cheaper) to process than monazite deposits, its got very low levels of Uranium and Thorium unlike monazite and xenotite deposits and the Cerium can be rejected at the first stage of the leach process unlike the monazite  deposits where the Cerium has to be carried all the way through. All these inherent properties of the deposit lead to the low operating and low capital costs.