Below is a comparison of the 2021 and latest study. Not...

Below is a comparison of the 2021 and latest study.Not definitive and meant only to stimulate discussion. Feel free to pull it to pieces, I have thick skin J

PRIMOBIUS 50 TPD ECS COMPARISON
Parameter	May 2021	Sept 2022
Covers	Integrated	Spoke
Accuracy	+/- 25% (Sep Ann say 35)	+30% - 10%
Cap Cost ($US)	165M	103M
Op Cost/t ($US)	1,560	1,440
Feed (Modules/Cells)	0/100	70/30
Exchange Rate (EU/US)	1.14	1.0 (12% devaluation)
Reason for Increase from Previous	Cap ·Construct/Own Buildings Op ·5%	Cap ·Feedstock mix ·Module discharge & disassembly ·+ Buildings Storage reqs Op ·Full Op cost unknown

Project costs have increased with each study.With the release of an incomplete study it is impossible to tell the extent to which costs have changed from 2021.Based on the Op costs it would appear that they at least will be higher.Would have been good to see some mention of the higher cost of doing business – costs faced by any producer, primary or recycler have increased (eventually this will be reflected in price but all it does now is give existing producers and advantage over new entrants).If commodity prices stay high these higher costs just reduce the rent existing and new entrants will earn until supply demand balance is reached.

Hard to tell the extent to which Cap Costs have changed. The 2021 study gives a greater breakdown of Direct/Indirect costs.The Hydromet is the next significant cost after Land and Buildings.Can we assume that the land and building costs for the Hydromet facility are included in this latest study (housed in the same structure)?If so then it may Cap out close to the original estimates (taking account of the macro change in input costs).

Regardless, Primobius cost advantage over primaries shouldn’t change nor the urgency for viable recycling options.The question, as it has always been is how we compare to the other recycler hopefuls (and any business not using hydrometallurgical processes can be discounted).In this regard, I haven’t seen any such information?

Also note that the margin of error in 2021 was 25% not 35% as stated in the latest study. So, while on the surface not a big thing, you now have to ask how much further along the certainty spectrum are we and, as I said while it’s a small error, are there any others?

Finally, the problem I see, as per other posters, is that the release of this study with so many unknowns creates uncertainty, is not a good look and will see exits from a risk perspective.

All of this notwithstanding, I have been and will continue to be in this for the long run.I expect the HUB study will explain the points raised above and it onwards and upwards for NMT.

My thoughts only

DOYR