Well if it was announced earlier, then my comments apply to that...

Well if it was announced earlier, then my comments apply to that earlier announcement. I haven't read the PEPR itself, and I only skim the announcements. So I'll take your word. Its not exactly a huge quarry, and many of the costs of permitting are fixed. So it wouldn't hurt ADN to explain the misalignment between the PEPR and DFS tonnage; even if that means repeating itself. Why? Because some investors may be thinking the company wishes to fix costs at 300k tpa, because those investors believe that's all ADN plans to produce, because that's all they think ADN can sell. It's not an irrational conclusion, given what many will see as a clown show to date. It's your choice to put me on ignore. Probably a good idea for you. But its not a good idea for the company to pretend such an interpretation is unlikely and invalid.