@Bullrush007 you are a liar , you have been caught lying in...

@Bullrush007 you are a liar , you have been caught lying in posts and you are not to be trusted.

@Logzy a fair shake of the sauce bottle ol mate. Not sure if you had been swigging on the sauce bottle before posting and the reason why I had thought so was this particular blanket call of, “Sure it’s all IMO but the facts are that we have heard this crap since the PLP days and nothing has much changed.”
Fact is PLP days LIT was attempting a Takeover which was successfully defending and defeated by management.
Fact is a suite of processes were created SM and acquired by LPD.
Fact is LPD successfully acquired a lepidolite deposit of a brownfield mine, exploration rights and all necessary documentation to start mining when funded.
Fact is LPD has increased MRE from 14yrs now out to 20yrs.
Fact is LPD has a 25yr lease of land in KEZAD and all necessary documentation to build a chemical plant in KEZAD.
Fact is LPD have a 7yr offtake agreement with TRAXYS
Fact is LPD have two sovereign countries in final stages of funding negotiations.
Fact is LPD management have been doing a bit in comparison to your assumption of ‘nothing has much changed’
Fact is Logzy I think you are out of order shining a light on others posts when in FACT a little illumination on one’s own posting may reveal you need to tidy up your own yard.

We are all in the same LPD boat if indeed we are all shareholders.
Ultimately ya can bail out or stay put, the choice is yours.
But blanketing all mum and dad’s investors make all their investments decisions from positive posts is BS.
They may aid them in researching points of order which could help them in achieving a researched result.

Obviously a balanced view of the situation re Qtly report , should encourage bilateral discussion on what is and what is not relevant to shareholders.
If a positive view derived from a shareholder’s interpretation of the wording may in deed be correct if you consider the same shareholders has the moxie to confirm with management what was meant by what they wrote.

And DDOG shall all proceeding announcements be nullified by a past Qtly wording ?? As new information arises new outcomes are produced, would you not agree??

Yes, it is understood management inferred a sequential funding arrangement would be ventured but as new information coming to light with the current Qtly, states LPD have both courses of action in play and would prefer a full funding solution over the secondary sequential funding option.
Well that’s how I have interpreted and had confirmed by management my interpretation was a correct understanding of the wording. I feel satisfied the sequential funding option is secondary to the preferred method.

As All Ways Please Verify the information with the Source from which it came re management.

I do implore all new and old shareholders not take any word of a Nim when making financial decisions. Seek and consult management what the wording of the Qtly means.

All the best to all new and old shareholders.

LT-B1