My attempt t answer some of the questions: 1. The new facilities...

My attempt t answer some of the questions:

1. The new facilities to be built in China and Moz are largely being built to handle this new supply of high quality graphite, it seems demand opportunities for enhanced graphite products have been apparent for a while but the lack of supply of raw material at volume and price that TON can provide has been the only thing holding it back. These opportunities are now able to be unlocked and YXGC are willing to expand their operations as a result of it. i.e we are creating new demand hence the only reason why we can sign such high offtakes, this demand was never factored in by the market when evaluating graphite mining prospects. It will now be forced to take it into consideration, so watch out when it becomes reality.

2. Triton will still get paid for the raw material as per norm and the proceeds of the sale will not form the JV's income. JV's income will solely be from the enhanced graphite products of which Triton will earn a share. The profit margins on the end product will be much much higher than the raw aterial, hence why Triton wants in and not feel like it's been robbed. The quality and size of TON's supply being it's greatest bargaining power, no one else right now can compete over 20 years and YXGC would know that.

3. We don't know yet, I expect an update soon articulating these details, also given TON's greater share of the overall profits across the two JVs I expect TON will contribute an equivalently higher share of capital. Likely where that difference between the mine capital cost and the LOI $200m capital will come into play.

4. I'd be surprised if these binding agreements were solely reliant on the outcome of one regulatory decision, I would take insulation as just one example and maybe if hat doesn't come through then the scale up of operation won't occur as quickly as envisaged but having the flexibility to built as many or as few processing lines as needed takes away the risk.

5.Using Nicanda Hill your calculation is maybe correct but Ancuabe flake likely not, I expect the DFS will propose a processing plant convenient enough to process flakes from both mines and hence require much less throughput than you state.

6.I think you're right to ask for this kind of information and going by Triton's communications with shareholders to date I have no doubt it will come in time. I am excited that in future we will be talking as much about the end market and what apple and Samsung are wanting as we will about more drier topics like port capacity

ALL in all I have to admit I never saw this coming, not from TON or any other graphite miner but I also don't know why I didn't, given it's the model Chinese operators have adopted for so long. We've been fed the brainwash from the north american graphite traders about limited specialised demand and serving their own interests all along the way for way too long, but luckily TON management hasn't believed it for a minute and realised the biggest opportunity was in the supply shift of the biggest consumer and controller of the graphite market in the world - China. Stuff the middle man, give the end user what they want at half the price and then your in a position a negotiate a share of their spoils too. I dare say we've elevated ourselves above the Simon Moores of the world!