Ann: Binding offtake agreement signed with LG Energy Solution, page-336

It says it lowers the costs.... after one has MHP & then converts it to a precursor.

LG would be the converter, not AUZ.

From the article: “So if you’re a miner, you’ll get 80% of the price versus 120%, clearly there’s a huge incentive to go all the way through to [producing] nickel sulfate,” Lennon said’”

End quote.

Why would he state there is an incentive for the miner to go all the way to sulfate if the return on cost wasn’t better than MHP?

He’s saying that going to sulfate is a better overall proposition for the producer.

LG! Such a large company and such a low commitment.My mistake! $0 isn’t a low commitment, it’s no commitment at all.

Let’s hope it gets done but let’s not pretend that MHP isn’t the better path for the producer or that AUZ failed to get funding when it thought it was going to sell the better return sulfates...

As the saying goes- we can put those hopes in one hand and *mud* in the other and see which one fills up first?

Back at just 60% of the 12mth high even with such ‘great’ news? Looks like the hand with mud in it may already be overflowing.