Apologies @Burlzey that was just a typo in my earlier post - was...

Apologies @Burlzey that was just a typo in my earlier post - was supposed to read 'PFS'.

As to the rest, it's only natural that someone trying to revive a previously failed project is going to highlight how different their new approach is to the old approach - otherwise, how would they get investors excited? At the end of the day, something has kept this resource stuck in the ground for over a decade, all whilst different studies are undertaken and approaches put forward. I think the history of a deposit is often understudied by investors - too many will fall into the "this time it's different1" trap, quoting either 'new macro' (i.e. green steel) or 'new management' (new approaches) and so on. But fundamentally, the resource stays where it is. With the credit markets where they are, and given the size of the capex flagged by the 2021 PFS, I think Razorback will stay in the ground for years still to come - unless a major suddenly decides it is worth their while. But the majors' recent history with magnetite has been anything but enjoyable for them. They'd likely be wary of a large project so far from infrastructure in the current stage of this cycle. Just my two cents. Cheers

Edit: @Orey7895 just saw your response immediately above, which very much proves the point I'm making.