I'm not educated about the technical details and am relying on...

I'm not educated about the technical details and am relying on memory from old announcements but have a vague recollection the piloting previously produced battery grade sulphates which were sent to potential partners for inspection. We didn't get paid for them yet. This announcement in the QAR is short on detail but they're distinguishing between previous piloting and the pCAM piloting currently required to finalise the DFS which suggests to my layman's eyes, and I could be way off mark, that now the Company must prove it can combine the sulphates into becoming the new material known as pCAM which will be 80% nickel, 10% cobalt and 10% manganese. This would seem to be supported by the Company previously stating it would be relying on a partner to bring their technology to the process of producing pCAM. Perhaps previously that statement was said when we had someone like Ecopro in mind as a partner as they already have a certain method of producing the pCAM material and now perhaps another entity is looking closely at potentially partnering with BSX who isn't necessarily already heavily involved in the process of producing pCAM themselves. Does that rule Samsung or BASF out? I don't know but if further piloting is required to prove BSX can make the product a partner wants to see, then we may well be getting closer. If the Australian Government or local mining industry players are looking to establish a secure battery supply chain for Australia and a new processing option and market for green ESG compliant Australian nickel to be fed into then this extra step would likely be required for the DFS IMO. The new piloting began in May which fits in well with the timing of the nickel industry crisis in Australia and suggests this new requirement may potentially be connected.