I'm sorry but this is completely unconvincing now. Upgrading to...

I'm sorry but this is completely unconvincing now.

Upgrading to a strategic priority is not explained at all. It's all about what a great prospect it is and how much progress has been made, with no reference of why it would be strategically important for a TVN. How does progressing exploration of a Pb project further our reason for being:

"We exist to execute a path to Net Zero emissions based on resource, technology and community.
Harnessing the power of Vanadium Redox-Flow Batteries (VRFB), Tivan has a vision to develop secure, sovereign and green large-scale grid storage. We offer a new and credible path to take Australia green."

This is a tactical move, raising money to progress a new project in a commodity other than the one we've built a team around, in order to get revenue so that we're not having to raise money to develop our actual strategic priority - TIVAN. Can't raise money for TIVAN so we're playing the small cap exploration market in the hopes of winning big.

Someone please explain the strategic alignment without reverting to what an amazing team GW is (I listened to the same thing about PB for years and years). Grant has put his dangling ones on the line going all-in with TVN so I'm sure he's doing everything he can to make it work, even tipping in another 100k in the process - but the line he has taken suggests that we're a lot further from developing TIVAN than he first thought. So much so that we're better off punting on exploration to bring in cash (or SP appreciation, and thereby cash with minimal dilution).

I'm staying here because, whatever I'm not rational. But, I'm sorry, a "strategic priority" should be aligned with your strategic plan. I highly doubt "lead" is mentioned in ours.