LYC never mentions NTU..why?...back up to date is Malawi where...

LYC never mentions NTU..why?...back up to date is Malawi where site reconstruction is underway.

oneforthe,
It is a rare chance I get to disagree with you my friend, so here goes...
NC did mention NTU by name in the Feb 2011 unrecorded investor call and I believe mentioned them in the last unrecorded call when he referred to "a xenotime mine with high Dysprosium numbers" (paraphrasing here). I think the NC references suggest a Joint Venture for processing in the future. Not mentioning them would suggest a Lynas takeover of NTU IMO.
But I see the JV on the table. I think the NTU ore will be concentrated by floatation at the NTU mine site, then in a JV it will be combined with Kenakunde low thorium ore to create a HREE rich mix that will remain within current Mt. Weld radioactive levels. I also think the LAMP will scale out so as not to mix the Mt. Weld concentrate with the NTU/Kenakunde concentrate. This should work with the LAMP design and all of the final oxides could be separated in the same facilities at the LAMP.
This JV would provide great synergies for both companies. It would dramatically focus NTU on mine development while shortening the NTU timeline. And Lynas would have a solid HREE supply that it could use to further it's long term supply contract marketing strategy. I think it happens and would be a big plus for both of these stocks.
I also think NTU gets some pop if the IAEA gives Lynas an approval this week.
Good luck to all.