AVZ chart, page-6299

Stakx, rather than continue to perpetuate this myth of materials being supplied by some producers which are of a nature not desired by the market, including by referring to sources which you then acknowledge (within 24 hours) as having biased viewpoints and suggesting they have questionable motives and failing to provide justifications to your claims, have you actually wondered why their customers are still lining up, signing off-takes, paying for product delivered, ordering more deliveries and moving forward with their contractual relationships? Have you, as suggested on a number of occasions, made any contact directly to the companies about which you now publish (publicly mind you) claims of product issues, to raise your concerns, or even complain to some governance organisation if you are concerned about announcements being improper or incorrect?

As I have stated in other places and at other times to you, I have made those contacts directly to said companies and have received responses which more than satisfy me with contractual agreements being fulfilled in a manner entirely consistent with publicly announced information and totally to my own satisfaction. Of course I acknowledge that you are totally free to believe me or not in those statements and it’s because I doubt anything I type, cut, copy or paste which I say has come from any such contact would have any impact on your belief structure in anyway that I’m not posting that material here.

Instead I’m inviting you to make your personal direct contact research to find out for yourself. Do you have access to the contact details for those companies? They do and will get back to enquires fairly quickly in my experience so —- pick up the phone or flick them an email request to see if your concerns or those you read of elsewhere have any foundation. (I’ve tried making similar approaches to our current topic being AVZ - very hard to get anything useful back out, or has your experience been different to mine?)

If what’s being produced is just “industrial grade”, which I understand by definition can’t be commercially made viable for battery use, why is it still being purchased by those in the battery supply chain? Maybe you’re just making a somewhat liberal use of the term “industrial grade”??? Maybe instead you should take up a position as purchasing advisor to the battery chem converters to point out to them all the $1B mistakes they’ve made so far and where they ought instead be sourcing their lithium from (please do because I’d like the peanut price SP here at AVZ to go bangbusters as much as every person who has parked some capital here - but we’ll need to get to mining first).