"exploration spend has been dwarfed by wages and admin for years."
I think they're only going to spend the minimum requirements on the project. Why spend more money for a project that isn't theirs?
We've had this conversation. Why do you continually regurgitate the same narrative, even after I've pulled you up on it & requested you defend your opinions? You fled the 1MC threads after I queried your angle & you then began regurgitating the same narrative on SYA threads.
I think it would be a little negligent for 1MC to spend double or triple the minimum money required on a project that isn't theirs. Don't you think?
Here's an analogy for you. Let's say you're in the market for a new car. You find one. Would you spend $2k for a mechanical overhaul on a car you're about to purchase? This isn't your car yet, you haven't bought it, the papers haven't been transferred into your name. Why would you spend $2k on a car that isn't yours?
Right so, Fish Lake isn't in the name of 1MC yet, the papers haven't been transferred over. They've been asked to spend a few million on a project in order to acquire it. It was part of the earn in agreement. That's all they're going to spend, a few million. They're not going to spend $10 million, build infrastructure, evaporation ponds or drill the entire project. Are they? Why? Because it's not their project yet!
So, we've established you're not a geologist, unable to defend your opinion (just ignore it & continue spreading your narrative on other threads) or an expert on the economic viability of any lithium projects. Good to know.
As you were.
SYA Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)