Ann: Quarterly Activities/Appendix 5B Cash Flow Report, page-190

Morning Y4 - hope you beat your hcp ... Peninsula - Mornington??? ... been enjoyed VIC's wine region this past week and head home today.

So last commentary from me on the OTA as I know it pains you and most SYA holders ... it doesn't pain me because as I have said on prior occasions, my investment decision to acquire SYA equity was based on seeking exposure to 100% of the NAL asset - because like many here - having NA sourced SC is strategic (and despite what you guys make think PLL is a part of that (and a major economic beneficiary with a "capital lite" contribution. CLP is also a part of that strategy but not capital lite).

The OTA was 60Ktpy and that was BEFORE NAL was acquired. PLL added to the acquisition and a JV formed. Success meant the 113Ktpy or 50% and LoM remained. It rose to 113Kt because of the capacity added - you can do the rough math to figure out why that 113 number came into being.

Shoulda, woulda,, coulda doesn't come into it. If my Auntie had balls she would be my Uncle. The agreement was NOT RENEGOTIATED it was EXPANDED under the same terms. If NAL was the prize (and it was) and if Authier was the route to get there, why would KP/PLL give up what they negotiated from the very beginning?? That makes no sense.

I get it, SYA BoD (led by the beloved BL at the time) negotiated a poor JV ... but maybe that was all they had available at the time. In hindsight is does not look good ...

HOWEVER

look at the reactions of posters here when SC were high and BL fumbled and said PLL gets the first 113Kt of production, quickly walked back to a JV allotment decision. Y'all wanted PLL at the back of the queue
Now, with SC prices low you want to stuff as much SC as the NAL can produce to PLL OTA in the hope that prices improve later.
Nice.

So, yes - I think I pretty well know what was agreed - and I don't believe it was ever renegotiated from the base agreement. There are multiple scenarios of course for the finer details (such as production cadence and allotments etc).

Back to the Qtrly for a moment though and I haven't really had the time to go through it yet, but as one poster has said "numbers dont lie" and they don't ... but they can present multiple interpretations when considered in different contexts. Now I don't think this Qtrly is that bad (it aint great either) but it is just that - a Qtrly. Its a snapshot in time (as at 31 Mar 2024) and over time (Q3).

I'm going to do my own more thorough analysis and as usual it's probably not going to be "in-line" with herd.