I made this table to compare, and understand, the new and the...

I made this table to compare, and understand, the new and the old cooperation agreements:

NEW	OLD
Equity Investment Agreement	Strategic Placement Agreement
Direct equity into MLBV (the JV)	Placement into LLL
Committed Stage 2 increase to 500ktpa	Study Stage 2 expansion to 500ktpa
Study co-invest into downstream facility closer to Africa	Same
Stage 2 offtake to include downstream tolling option	Same
Jointly funded exploration	Same
USD 137.2m to JV	AUD 106.1m to LLL ~USD70
additional 5% interest of MLBV (total 55%)	9.9% of LLL (share dilution)
Stage 3 offtake = equity ie. 55%	Stage 3 offtake 50:50%
Stage 1 offtake control 100% Gangf	Same
Stage 2 offtake control 70% Gangf	Same, Gangf 350ktpa, LLL150ktpa
All stages, Gangf offtake profit flows to JV, then split .: Gangf profit +5% from JV No exposure to LLL controlled offtakes	Gangf would have received JV share of profit, and 9.9% of LLL profit /share .: 3.5-4% JV profits?
CAPEX responsibilities 55% gangf, 45%LLL ( clarified on conf. call)
Increased Gangfeng representation in government level meetings in Mali (stated in conf. call)
Easier regulatory approval in China (and FIRB* Assumed)
Expected JV ownership, 50% Gangf, 40% LLL, 10% Mali
Worst case JV ownership; 45% Gangf, 35% LLL, 20% Mali

From the details that have been given the agreements appear fairly even; Gangfeng will pay into the JV twice as much cash as they would of paid to Leo for ongoing JV expenses, they receive a 5% increase in stake, a slightly better profit percentage from offtake Lithium controlled by Gangfeng, and they take on an additional 5% of JV CAPEX responsibilities (as clarified in the teleconference). They also don't profit from the Leo controlled offtakes