Ann: Fish Lake Valley Lithium Project Update, page-26

I see Tesla playing the PRC game that they played with Alita, over time.

The game: Get as many suppliers as you can, signed up and secured, and them play them off for each other in pricing.

It is my personal belief that the market is going the wrong way, signing up for unconditional supply agreements.

Why? The world wants Lithium, it needs lithium, because it is being mandated by law that green energy must be deployed, with lithium being a core essential component in current green energy processes. This means, that by law, lithium must be purchased - even if a power supplier or vehicle supplier does not want to deploy the technology, they are required to. By law.

If the world wants what we have, and there is a deficit, why are we signing fixed price or variable prices with floors and maximums, on supply agreements?

I like what another ASX player is doing, auctioning part of their supply to the market. I have been saying for many years this is the best way to go - it forces the market to behave as a true unrestricted market in real time, rather than stepped over time as supply agreements expire (which staggers supply pricing rises and falls).

I have concerns as a large scale supplier such as AVZ comes online that this increased supply will be used against the market as a whole, but ignored when there is a deficit in times such as there is now.

Full disclosure: I own shares in AJM, AVZ, SYA, KAI, and held shares previously in PLS & A40 - all lithium related stocks.