Hey RC, My two cents…It would be good to have some insight into...

Hey RC,

My two cents…

It would be good to have some insight into the drivers of the rebrand strategy, right? More importantly, why right now at this stage of their growth cycle?

Outsiders can acknowledge that Murchison has become a primary focus and a bankable resource for LCD, a view strengthened by their exploration results in 2021. Aside from the lucky dip of Circle Valley, the company has framed it’s future prosperity on Murchison, based on the discovered resource (of which there is plenty) and the future expansion of said resource (of which there is significant promise).

When viewing org name changes, usually the company either a) wants to get away from the ghosts of the past; or b) is transforming into a new entity; or c) Executive vanity / hubris.

While I can’t speak much to the ghosts of the past, it's clear LCD has jagged to a different path than what it was once on. The refreshed management have taken the company in a positive direction, methodically and with some strategic nous. They'll need to continue to run a tight ship to build and sustain market confidence. It’s hard won and easily lost.

As for any risk of hubris, the company has been building its title as a quiet achiever. Less razzle-dazzle, more compound, incremental growth from its actions. So a name change for reasons akin to an Executive midlife crisis, doesn’t quite fit the established profile. That shouldn’t stop us from evaluating that possibility though, at any decision point.

Like you, my initial reaction on the name change was mixed. Is it necessary right now? Is it going to make any discernible contribution to shareholder value? Does it warrant distraction when the core pursuit is resource definition and production? Does this narrow the horizon to other exploration opportunities that are beyond Murchison?

With early runs on the board, my fallback position is to trust management and back the change. My outside view, is that they’re in the process of realising Murchison as a company maker and acknowledging that, they are laying down the strategic tracks (including name change) to build upon its growth. That they’re tying their brand to the geographical patch might be seen as emerging confidence in the upside of this resource, longitudinally across many years. In writing a multi-year strategy, calling out the significance of Murchison through an early name change is a pragmatic step within the rising staircase. Doing it early in the Murchison exploration, as this seems to be, is like confidently calling out ‘six green in the top right pocket’ on the way to victory….

I’d like to see them tick this box quickly with minimum expenditure and hasten actions that are directly linked to shareholder value……

GLTAH.