Hey there my point is they are two completely different projects and with two completely different prospects of funding. all startup mining ventures are risky and both have an endgame of producing lithium - for me thats as far as it goes for comparison
INF is trying to get some of the euro funding pot, absolutely zero guarantee they will get any - zero percent of $750B is still zero. Good on them for asking but lets not get carried away versus VUL that has shown the ease in which they can raise $100M and have the Hancocks collectively owning 11% of the company the method of extraction of lithium for both companies is completely different, completely. VUL revolutionary and zero carbon (actually they will be pumping excess power in to the grid sobis even greener), and from what i understand INF is just an old school hard rock miner. This is chalk and cheese
finally, and the big one. INF may be further ahead than VUL, but VUL is not dependant on the support of local government for the continuation of their project nor is there the fear of litigation. INF is 100% at the mercy of goverments and the courts and the locals
I think it was the european commission that said the INF project has great merits but can only go ahead with the approval of the local community and government - we all know this is the massive issue (i can find the quote if needed)
in summary - the VUL risk is the technology versus the INF risk is the massive opposition
its not the same. We should be comparing INF to another hardrock lith miner if you want, not VUL
Me personally - i hold both for different resson. VULs differentiation and gambling on INF being successful in the courts
side note - i have no idea why you thought it necessary to make a personal comment about the sale price of your VUL shares and whether or not ive sold mine - thats completely irrelevant
