Considerations against the merger, page-9

In AMAL defence;

1. TAW would be non existent without AMAL, I don’t think we could say that the other way around, they could have found someone else but they wouldn’t have been able to do what Mr C has done imo.

2. AMAL had already lots of licensing/permitting, infrastructure/existing TA plant in place without which would mean a much higher capex and a project that could be another 12 months+ from production, meaning a lot more dilution, lower SP.

3. AMAL brought Burwill onboard, without which financing/ offtakes would not have been wrapped up as quickly, through Burwill Weier was brought onboard to the TAW register and provided capital to rapidly progress developments.

4. AMAL has talked about downstream processing, they have been ambitious from the start as they were aware of rapid battery developments in China, same can’t be said for Mr C until recently.

As with all the above there are arguments against and the same can Be said for any point made, it just comes down to how you perceive the deal. It seems fairly obvious to me this whole project ran seamlessly, show me another project 100% owned that has done what this JV has done. I am still fully convinced this is a merger on equals, each JV partner had a role to play.

Disclaimer; Have never owned any AMAL shares but can see that both sides have played a role. Nobody is getting taken adavntge of with this merger imo