Ann: Trading Halt, page-42

I also watched the video. I thought he looked haggard in this interview. Understandable given the current situation.

On the one hand I can appreciate his point of view but on the other the reality is the LSOP project had the easiest route to environmental approvals when compared to all peer WA SOP projects (with the exception of SO4). From memory there was no WA EPA public review. Kalium didn't have a public review but did require Federal approval.

Compare to Reward who were subjected to a lengthy WA EPA public review and Federal approval. Agrimin has a public review. Public interest isn't just from troublesome individuals but in the case of Reward included submissions from the nations leading experts on a range of matters.

He mentions night parrots as well as skinks. With respect to parrots, APC listened for a handful of nights, Reward listened for hundreds of nights.

Of course the WA EPA deemed the work done by APC to be sufficient and we have no reason to doubt this. At the end of the day someone at APC or their consultants left the door open for a third party to cause this disruption. The Federal Department may appear superfluous given the apparent capabilities of the WA EPA but they exist to give added protection to certain species. And the Act existed before this current Labor government.

My guess is the culprit isn't a Nepal trekking, eco warrior but someone related to the traditional owners. You only have to consider the ABC news article and the WA EPA appeals to know that APC hasn't pacified everyone with their workshop funding.

I think his comments about NAIF were very professional. I don't think NAIF pulling out now means they can't be approached in the future. His comments about strategic investors didn't sound very positive which isn't unexpected. Given the current situation at Kalium I doubt if any WA SOP company will get funding for a full size project. The technical risk, particularly from the flotation based processing flowsheets (which includes APC) is very high if you consider KLL & SO4. The cost of development in WA has gone up since most of the existing feasibility studies were completed.

I think APC will have to seriously reconsider its options as per Trigg and Reward. Trigg is in survival mode, concentrating on developing an alternative to conventional brine evaporation to produce salts. They have shut down field work and slashed costs. Reward is probably now the best placed of all the companies. Not only does their flagship project have all environmental approvals, they also have their own processing technology which looks very attractive from a development perspective. It is scaleable, applicable to a range of potassium containing brines and can be licenced. Agrimin has managed to maintain a relatively high market cap but its funding requirements will be very high.