Again Names, considering this isn't the MNS thread I'll resist...

Again Names, considering this isn't the MNS thread I'll resist addressing "body language" analysis and offtake partner discussions relevant to MNS and not TON. If you'd like more information on that by the way, feel free to head on over to the relevant forum and ask any question you like.

This is not a deflection by the way, I would call posting about a MNS perceived "problems" on the TON forum a deflection away from discussing issues that are actually relevant to TON. For example, perhaps a discussion about how the Renamo and Fremillo peace agreement looks shaky as questions about new civil conflict arise? How this might affect timelines of applications requiring government approval such as individual mining licenses for both Nicanda Hill (submitted?) and Ancuabe (not submitted?) while the new Mining Act is continually delayed in parliament due to more (presumably) pressing matters?

I can understand what a coup it might be if TON were to snag one (or both) of MNS's offtake partners, but how would XY feel about that, TON supplying all that identical material to well established competitors? It's also interesting that articles are written about Sinosteel's liquidity issues and they are immediately written off as a genuine offtake partner, yet in the same respect SQ is still mentioned here? Fair play here, until either are ruled out, they're still very much in contention and anything outside of that is speculation.

As for Hatch's comments, he needs to do a little more research if he's suggesting that MNS is where TON was in July. Seems to have the blinkers on if he thinks that the latest MNS rise was due to proof of concept drilling. Seems to me that TON are still the ones drilling.

Cheers