I'm going to make the (probably false) assumption that everyone...

I'm going to make the (probably false) assumption that everyone commenting has at the very least read and tried to understand the Chapter 11 Listing guidelines published by the ASX.

Just to make it easier
https://www.asx.com.au/documents/rules/Chapter11.pdf

We (FLG) a mining company, are trying to buy a mining asset in a country where we already have 2 mining assets. Hmm....

To make it even easier to discuss, and since I can't get an answer from PL (insider trading etal) I'll put up the next best thing (AI)\


Surely 1&2 are obvious even to ASX compliance officer straight out of high school.
Item 3 would be contentious ... what's "too big" ... I would look to Rosario acquisition (or even Tama Atacama) and that proceeded.



Really. I mean Really? AYKM!!! Insufficient funds ... why on earth would the seller waste their time. Look at how Option Agreements work. This is mining for God's sake.


OK that part of my rant is over....

Well @Tex77 I would agree with
"And those toxic funding arrangements in place are useless - the latest 4C said 18 quarters of cash, yet, those funding facilities require market liquidity to access the funds."
but not
"The listed company that doesn’t really want to be listed!"
Its the ASX that is holding FLG up. Would it be toxic if FLG had liquidity?

Read what PL is trying to do ... this is a mining company ... what would you rather do ... nothing and pray Thailand turns around. That project is FINISHED. Only if Thai govt supports a localized supply chain will RKLP work. Exporting Lepidolite concentrate ... what a worthless business. I expect an impairment in this year's annual report.

Would like nothing more than a Gold project first (acquisition unknown), Copper project second (Rosario) and Lithium Brine project (Tama) third (that is if Lithium turns around).

If not, then yeah maybe its toilet paper. But instead of emailing PL maybe email ASX???