I have been researching this stock since the ex-CXO guy came on board for DSO.
There's been some discussion re: which type of phosphate is best for LFP: igneous v sedimentary
I present:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/sp/mapped-where-is-the-best-phosphate-for-lfp-batteries/It clearly says igneous. Why? Less impurities. AEV doesn't mention rock type in Anns. However, if you read the Ann from 10/6/08: Correction to Classification of Resource Estimate, it clearly says Wonarah is mudstone and Chert Breccia (sedimentary). One needs to read all the details rather than do a word search in the PDF, as the key details are an image and not text. The same document refers to an old study which says the deposit is uneconomic due to factors such as strip-ratio. Mind you this is from 40+ years ago and tech has changed.
Further, the map highlights igneous deposits in Finland. Who plans battery solutions in Finland? FREYR, partner of Aleees.
Next up... impurities. Go back to the earlier MRE Statements. It is broken down by all the elements.
Then we get to DSO. This was tried back in 2H/2009... what happened next? Pivot to Senegal phosphate and other projects. Whilst this is before the current management, why would the previous management pivot to other projects, including a phosphate project in Africa after they had already started Wonarah DSO?
As for the LFP Plant? Kohler asks: did you pay them (the partners)? Answer: Yes. No risk; all reward.
As for NT Government? No risk; all reward if AEV can get the project up.
PS. I also had to giggle at a mention of a Phosphate Market Research report compiled by a firm in India. Does this ring any bells to some posters here? If not, it should.
