Although I do find the blatant cross promotion of KOD distasteful, the conversation runs both ways. This is a discussion that started today on one of the LSE sites.
BGS V KOD
Ultimately having BGS discussed in international circles can only be good for us.
Things is though, BGS are on track to start building an open pit operation possibly within 12 months. We will be producing quick enough to take advantage of the current demand/supply issue with lithium. KOD, AVZ and the other lithium hopefuls still in the exploration stage will find it much harder as their peers will be much better established and funded. Even though KOD may have better grades and bigger tenement size, BGS clearly has a superior risk/return profile. Both have significant upside, but KOD is still exploration (high risk), whereas we have derisked Goulamina thoroughly.
Compared to AVZ, I reckon KOD is much more competitive and there definitely will be synergy having another lithium producer like BGS right next door. Mali>DRC for sovereign risk, distance, infrastructure etc. So I think 'investors' in AVZ/4CE are far more likely to be interested in KOD than BGS holders, I would suggest to snowleopard that he post it on their forums. Different stage of the game here i'm afraid.
