We have been here a long time many of us (on and off for myself)...

We have been here a long time many of us (on and off for myself) and much has changed for which of course one needs to consider/review why hold shares in ARU. Of course that can be difficult when limited details are provided or guidance is a little or considerable to the highside either CAPEX/OPEX or product price guidance for example. Not being critical of this PFS - there is a lot of details and years in the progress/expenditure - release.

I am asking why/if I am going to continue to hold - it is pertinent with any holding to review upon major changes - we know all the key past significant achievements and now the PFS arrives - obviously the RIO investment is one of significance.

The PFS is significant but a lot can change on the path to the DFS/BFS - my take is 2 years for approvals and DFS/BFS. Not a lot one can do there but follow up with company announcements/reporting - battery tech developments - graphite demand/pricing as projected/anticipated 2025 that demand expected to increase substantially - will it? Of course graphite qualification news/progress - offtakes and any project financing news would be positive in the next 2 years. And of course the RIO situation. With those 2 last ones being critical - financing as in where does it come from and RIO what is there plan going ahead - well at this stage we'll find out if they take up the other 4.99% option in time.

Then there is this option t(hat I can not understand due to lack of information) for RIO to run the Kasiya operation and keep 40% of production or something of the like post the release of the DFS - they must decide 3-6 months post DFS release. This one I need some help with - 2ic/anyone. What Kasiya operation? - we only have a DFS - no finance or am I missing something. Is RIO going to provide finance for Kasiya development to close that arrangement/deal? A debt facility that SVM pay back from their allocated 60% of product or pay back an agreed % of project development costs. It all sounds a little unconventional - and why would RIO bother to enter into such an agreement that if they see great value and wish to operate the Kasiya project on some 40% product arrangement - surely they would be more interested in taking over the lot - which they probably would do in the longer term on this arrangement but at a higher cost to them.

I'm just trying to digest some things here. Time wise maybe 2 years for DFS and approvals - then there is the extra 4.99% takeup from RIO and then there is this option to operate Kasiya timeline.
Then there is no Kasiya without finance - so where is the finance coming from - it has to be RIO (they have absolutely snuffed out any other interested parties) but in what form - a debt facility - surely RIO do not operate this way! If they are going to commit to finance Kasiya then surely they would want to take it over to full ownership well before that 2-21/2 year timeline arrives where they have to decide if they are going to operate Kasiya.

Expect I will hold (it's not sheep stations but fair). Expect to see RIO add the 4.99% as an indication of possible full takeover. When and at what price and is this really why I want to hold - probably not and 5% fixed term is probably a lot more boring but less to worry about re the unknowns here and timelines. SVM invited them in and now it will be interesting to see how SVM management deliver to shareholders a positive outcome when they are now playing with the best in the mining world whom have hundreds of top shelf suits doing top level deals daily - how is our board going to work in with them and their project team - how is RIO going to approach the SVM board and project team - starting with the PFS and reality - likely changes - especially if RIO are to provide the finances - then run Kasiya.

On face value the RIO arrival appears a possible company maker for a struggling junior in SVM - but it could be other.