IP is not acquired just by folks that want to use it, just look...

IP is not acquired just by folks that want to use it, just look at the apple v samsung IP war. related patents were acquired many of which had little bearing on the particular case. Given the complexity and number of patents lodged/accepted in the graphene space over the past couple of years there is likely to be many cases of a similar nature as these things start to become a reality, and there are some big hitters in the IP stakes for graphene based tech. This is not to say that BEST will be in that category, and certainly its not at the vanguard of the explosion in patents, but pursuing IP is not entirely an unsound path, as it can be used for more than just protecting your product or acquisition even, more on this later.

FGR have done the royal show bag trick, and you'll likely find they are in the testing/validation/QC stage for some of these.

QC for vein to graphene begins with separating the grades of ore, if they can do that - which some have suggested is possible by eye for experienced persons - the rest is a matter of ensuring consistent manufacturing processes, given the simple nature of the process this part is probably the easiest, but will lie with the end user who is buying the graphene cell.

Pricing structures have been discussed, they aren't looking to sell at $x/t they want to ship ore to the user and the user applies the graphene cell, plus whatever customisable addons that they require to produce the product spec they require. FGR wants to take a royalty based on the value add, so I guess you are in agreeance as both methods you'd think should come to roughly the same price?