A good question given what happened during 2016. The difference...

A good question given what happened during 2016. The difference here is that battery makers and OEMs are ready to scale now. The constituents that make the battery are more settled and that uncertainty in battery material moving forward has now become industry standard. This was not the case in 2016.

The supply chain is now the biggest constraint that will eventually build out. Investors will more than likely over the next couple of years be properly building out their position. The understanding being a supply shortage which means the company that can generate large volumes at quality and scale have the opportunity to capture an unoccupied market share. The race is now on. Plenty of room to grow.

There will be volatility as the market moves around trying to find the appropriate company moving forward and build out of position. Lake to me satisfies all criteria above.

Long term holders need not worry as they were already doing what the market is doing now 3 to 4 years ago. They will ultimately arrive at the same conclusion and research.

Lake Resources has a low opex to navigate oversupply demand and reduce it as the market needs as it is modular. Lowering cost. So yes cost effective.

Interest in the company is determined by the position of its competitors. Majority who do not have economies of scale or have already committed capital expenditure to evaporation ponds. Lake has plenty of goods news on the way so if your not aware then maybe this is not the company for you. Steve has been saying the same things for three years. Strategy has not changed.