Hi Catex, I know you're responding to Rocko, but reading your...

Hi Catex, I know you're responding to Rocko, but reading your post I just wanted to ask a few questions to make I follow what you're saying.

Disclaimer: I have only been following the graphite industry for approximately 3 years.

So what you're saying is that it is near impossible for any new greenfield site to get into production? And the only way for this to happen is to build the plant first as you can only get a true binding off-take using actual plant production, and you can only get debt funding from plant production off-takes?

In some respects I understand, and agree where you're coming from. However I do believe from what I have seen in the past 3 or so years is that there is a change happening in the graphite space, be it greater demand and alternate demand from "traditional graphite sources".

Yes graphite is very different to other industrial materials in that there are varying properties across deposits, and requirements for varying end uses. Hence I fully agree with the need to qualify off-takes.

Looking at Kibarans off-takes, do you not believe this is/has been done to an extent with TK and Sojitz? Off the top of my head, TK took approx 9 months to go from LOI to binding for their off-take. I don't believe they spent the nines with an off-take on management's desk just waiting to be signed. I'd say there was some testing done to confirm and "qualify" the graphite as far as they could to ensure the qualities were there that they were after. Sojitz are now running their own "production-scale tests" and I would guess the outcomes would determine whether they go binding or not.

Have I seen the finer details of the off-take agreements? No. Do I know they're binding? Yes? Do I expect there is a get out clause if the actual production graphite does not meet certain specifications / initial qualifying parameters? Yes.

The size of the off-takes are small (actually I don't think they are, but compared to the greater graphite space they are minuscule) and so is the size of initial production. This is why I like Kibaran is going about business. Graphite is not just 'dig it up and you'll sell it'. In a way you can look at Epanko initially as a pilot plant, starting off small and then increasing production significantly 'if' and 'when' the market decides that it likes what is being produced.

Which other graphite play around the world has approached a greenfield site in this manner?

I'm sure you do have a better understanding of the graphite space than me, but I don't believe that things will be as they are in the future, because that's the way it's been. I also think that Kibaran management have a better understanding of the graphite than me and seem to be taking a diligent approach to production for a greenfield site.

I don't think it's fair to be copying and pasting the same post across all graphite forums, however that's your understanding and opinion, so fair enough.

Kibaran is not dependent on the EV market, and certainly not sitting here dreaming of, or expecting at all for that matter, to be supplying Tesla. The motor industry is heavily subsidised by governments all across the world (now this is an industry I have more than 3 years experience in ).

P.s. I'm living in Vancouver and for $100k a pop, there sure are a lot of Tesla's driving around, and I believe they're only going to get cheaper.