RIM and Scandium Recovery

I posted in reply to a previous comment but its important investors understand RIMs atmospheric leach results were actually very disappointing and their announcement of 90% scandium recovery is quite misleading in my opinion.

The two announcements are:
https://www.rimfire.com.au/pdf/11c8b8a9-669f-4cf7-a920-c1f6c33f9f8f/Sc-Co-Ni-recoveries-demonstrated-at-atmospheric-pressures.pdf
https://www.rimfire.com.au/pdf/b7ed2484-1c0a-4ff0-b008-7861dd4ffe2b/Melrose-leaching-test-work-generates-up-to-90-Sc-recoveries.pdf

The best recovery in the first test work (LT08) was only 39.9%. This is very poor and not viable.

In the next set of tests the acid used was MASSIVE - this is reflective of theoretical conditions only, but RIM did not describe it this way in the title which I believe has misled investors. Quotes from the second announcement are:

The acid dosages for LT09 and LT10 were deliberately set high and resulted in consumptions of
602 kg H2SO4 / dry tonne of ore (LT09) and 1,604 kg H2SO4 / dry tonne of ore (LT10).
It is noted that the acid consumptions used in LT09 and LT10 were used in the tests to better
understand conceptual leaching parameters (“parameter boundaries”).

LT10 delivered the 90.1% Sc recovery whilst LT09 was only 62.6% recovery (at 82 degrees temperature as well)

Use of 1.6t of acid (not dilute liquid actual H2SO4 which is sulphuric acid) per tonne of ore cannot be viable in any situation. That much acid would dissolve almost anything and it would be almost impossible to neutralise as well. Quite literally, most of the material in the ore gets dissolved with that much acid.

Rim directors SHOULD NOT have put out an announcement with a heading saying "up to 90% Scandium recoveries" because this is misleading and only reflective of laboratory conditions. Lab conditions have no relevance to be cited in that context in an ASX announcement. The average investor easily gets confused and thinks this might be reflective of commercial leaching conditions - it most certainly is not. The fact people on this board talk about "good recovery" from Rim's work is exactly why that announcement was so misleading.

LT08 delivered only 39.9% scandium recovery - this is most certainly not viable. I'm unsure on how much acid they added because I can't see it in the 4/3 announcement but the pH was sub 0.5, so a lot of acid was used. Perhaps its possible to find a way to get 39.9% up, but this is no certainty.

So far RIM has demonstrated atmospheric leaching is NOT VIABLE. Their announcements don't say that however, but the data does not lie.

This is why the directors and management have a question mark in my view - the leach results have been presented in a way that is quite misleading in my opinion.