Ann: Company Update - Key Developments, page-91

@88crazyhorse

All good and not taken as having a go mate. I don't bother sending emails to management anymore. I have in the past and it's always a generic reply, and it's not like they can divulge price sensitive information via an email to an individual poster, so it's fruitless.

Yes the tech grade product might have eventually made its way into battery grade through multi-run reprocessing, however there was at least a two-month lag when only tech/primary product was being produced. It was another three months until singe run production of battery grade. This means there was at least five months duration of tech grade production.

Anyway, I was simply responding to a poster who mentioned that there had been "no statement of tech grade production", which was clearly incorrect. It's important that we're accurate about what's being discussed.

Onto your point though, it still remains unclear what the ratio of battery grade vs tech grade will ultimately be. I know that the "target" is 100%, but let's be realistic. No lithium brine producer has ever achieved 100% battery grade output. This includes FMC (Livent), where Pablo worked for a couple of decades. If he couldn't achieve 100% for them, where's the evidence to say he can make it happen for AGY? I'm not taking the piss by the way, it's a serious question. With all the resources FMC (Livent) had, and holding Pablo's production patent, why didn't they chase 100% output of the highest value product, even with the availability of a hybrid pond/DLE process?