So the rationale is that LGE are just siting on Sconi as it cost...

So the rationale is that LGE are just siting on Sconi as it cost them nothing? - while I do not agree with that premise the natural extension of that logic is that in order to bother "sitting on something that is not costing them something" they must have some motivation to do so because they see value in Sconi and expect to require it to supply nickel to them in the future which would dispute the commentary by many non holders that Sconi is a deposit not worth worrying about.

FutureEarth's relay of the information he received would indicate that there are ongoing discussions which would be unlikely if LGE were just sitting on the resource with no intention of doing anything about it at the moment.

Other arguments have been advanced in other posts that LGE is sitting on Sconi to stop other companies - that assumption fails also as if another company came along and offered Sconi a good offtake deal the LGE Offtake is now at a stage where either party can exit it.

At some stage we will know the situation - at the moment I am more inclined to the view that LGE are persisting with Sconi as they want access to the resources and accordingly they are seeking to overcome whatever obstacles they see via ongoing discussions with the company possibly waiting for those obstacles to be resolved.

Eventually we will know the outcome either LGE will commit further or walk away - until then all discussions here are really only recycling existing views/assumptions - only 2 issues have been added to our knowledge recently:

(1) 31/3 date came and went with no resolution of discussions
(2) FutureEarth was advised that negotiations were continuing and AUZ hoped to advise an outcome in the foreseeable future

one negative and one positive for shareholders.