Ann: Final 2023 Drill Hole Results for the CV13 & CV9 Pegmatites, page-129

This thread and the PMT threads in general have been overtaken by WR1 holders for some bizarre reason. There has unfortunately been a plethora of false information. Comparisons have been continuously made between WR1 and PMET, thus I'll contribute to the comparisons. And I make these comparisons while noting that Adina is a fantastic project, and WR1 deserves a ton of credit for having pro-active management that has made some bold moves that should lead to success. I believe WR1 is extremely undervalued.

Resource size: PMET delivered a pit constrained (43-101) due to being listed on the TSX, WR1 released a non pit-constrained resource (JORC). The pit constraint will significantly decrease tonnage in the 43-101. Really nice MRE from WR1, but if that was a 43-101 resource, it would be < 40 Mt. If PMET released a JORC resource, they would have a resource that is +140 Mt at 1.4 % Li2O.

Land package: There is no comparison in resource size upgrade potential at Adina and Corvette. Corvette has the land package size to be district scale, and can possibly pass Pilgangoora in resource size. It's possible the length of Adina/Jackpot land package will be about the size of the strike length of CV5-CV13, for perspective. The best comparison of Corvette, i.e., predominately a single dike that is structurally controlled by major fault structures and splay faults that host other pegmatites, will likely be Greenbushes long-term, imo.

Mineral processing: something about Corvette having small grains and not being amenable to DMS because of grade and correlated recoveries has been constantly posted here, and that take is entirely wrong. Grade and recovery %'s are usually not unrelated, especially in DMS processing. Recovery in DMS processing is primarily a function of grain size (spodumene size), not grade. The coarse grain size allows the minerals of interest (spodumene) to more easily separate, and the coarser the grain size, the less crushing needed to achieve high recoveries (lower opex). It’s also the purity (not grade), e.g., low mica/petalite content, low FeO, that additionally allows for high recoveries. WR1 processed spodumene during metallurgical testing at 6.3 mm crush sizes, PMET completed metallurigical testing that liberated spodumene at 6.5mm and 9.5 mm crush sizes. Patriot successful crush sizes are so high because the spodumene grains are often so large. Look at prior NR's; +1 meter single spodumene grains were commonly encountered.

Lake draining: this is mining in Canada, aka bog land, not dry WA. Want to know another mining project that had partial lake drainage prior to mining/construction? The Renard Diamond Mine: https://www.mining.com/new-canadian-diamond-mine-would-drain-lake/

CAPEX/OPEX: the capex at Corvette will be very high, no doubt about. WR1 really scored with the Renard mine acquisition and if they can build a road for 1-2 million USD/km, their initial capex costs for the 80-100 km road to Renard may only cost 80-200 million USD minus tax breaks. There will still be additional capex costs, e.g., the DMS plant at Renard will without a doubt need some modifications and repurposing. Opex will be higher given higher transportation costs, but still savings overall. Their production capacity will be limited, though. I think the part folks are forgetting is that Corvette may have enough production capacity to be a sole distributor of spodumene concentrate to Albemarle for a conversion facility. They may instead be trucking spodumene nearby to make a LiOH or LiCO3 conversion product. Opex at PMET with 800ktpa production capacity will be unparalleled, more than offsetting the high capex costs.

There's so much more that can be covered, but content being posted has really dropped down the quality of hotcopper as a platform to learn about mining and mining projects. Hope that changes.