Well, for the PFS it does matter, the trouble with VMS is they...

Well, for the PFS it does matter, the trouble with VMS is they have beaten this drum before all the way to the BFS. So whose to say this isn't a rinse and repeat?

Plus:

The average time to get a mine going from go to production, according to that CHN article, is five to seven years. PLS went from first drill hole to production in four years. Mt Lindsey is fourteen years so far. It does not inspire confidence and that is one of the reasons why VMS is not following Tin prices.
Tin prices are also historically quite volatile. Look at the price between 1980 and 1986. A drop of about 60%. 2011 and 2016, 50% drop.
The Tin price hike in the 1980's was due to home electronics. 2011 falling production in Indonesia, plus Chinese smelters being off line. Part of todays pump (which are not record prices in real terms) is do with a huge demand in home computers, TV's etc. during lockdown. So expect more volatility.

Importantly

"The tin market – the smallest market at the LME – is prone, due to its relative small size, to wild swings as hedge funds and other speculators take positions."

So does Tin prices effect VMS, yes but it has to be at least forward looking, worst case for the BFS. Not todays price, we're not producing. PLS did their PFS @ $540. I think the price is now 10X's that.

FYI. The pump re EV's is nothing likely more than a pump. The change over from a ICE to EV takes a huge amount of Tin out of the ICE production to fill the new electronics solder spot. Which is why the word 'may' is used in presentations, "Electric vehicles may increase tin use:"

"Are high Tin prices positive or are Low prices negative?"
Irrelevant at this stage. At near ATH today, does not mean we don't hit LTL tomorrow (although I doubt it).

As for the PFS in 2022, we'll see.