@dynofishI have to disagree with your negatives, which I see as...

@dynofish

I have to disagree with your negatives, which I see as neutrals: they are inherent to ramping up at every mine. Expecting the recovery obtained at lab (78 % in our case) from the first day of production was never realistic. Rumours in these threads didn't help.

Over the general issues of a ramping-up, we have to take into account that the raw material they are employing these first months was not contemplated for SC concentration informer studies (DFS) due to its low grade. Actually, it was waste with no commercial value in that study (please, don’t forget the market prices at those times: you don’t spend time and efforts with low grade material if you expect to cash soooo many dollars with higher-grade ores). So it’s sensible to accept that now they will need more tonnes of that lower-grade raw material to produce SC6 that what will be needed once at nameplate, and that a lower product (SC5.x) could be delivered at this stage if that makes sense from an economic point of view. Don’t forget that the high quality of the pegmatite at KV allows us to produceSC6 at lower costs that most producers, but the same is true for any SC5.x.
...And for those wanting to bring the issue of the higher costs of underground mining of lithium, please take a breath and remember that the raw material under consideration is the removed one at the surface (open-pit like).