Ann: Binding offtake agreement signed with LG Energy Solution, page-416

Cheers but 3 - 2 = 1 point supporting the pursuit of funding when the 3 reasons weren’t enough is not painting myself in to a corner. That incredibly simple point is why I believe this post is relevant because it compares this offer to the one which failed to entice funding.

Scattergun? Look at it from the side of the poor ( now poorer ), retailers who just bought in at over 2.5 cents, some of whom may have visited this forum and said to themselves ‘wow! There’s bankers* and even an industry expert* defending this! It must be worth risking my hard earned savings!’

One little scattergun against a flock all singing ‘we can see a pot of gold from our lofty ( unsubstantiated ), position up here!’

*None of which have provided credentials.

Again. I hope it works but one must admit that 3 reasons for funding were better than the 1 presented now.... especially when the remaining 1 reason is itself a worse return ( MHP is a apparently a worse return scenario for the producer, in this case AUZ ), for the company.

Don’t forget- BHP etc are ramping up production to meet the market ( as they are more than capable of doing ), as we speak....