@Kikker1959 Had no intention of posting here as I said my views...

@Kikker1959 Had no intention of posting here as I said my views some weeks back and they have not changed so I was content to leave it at that for now,...But as you tagged me to reply to some questions here on the LTR thread here is my responses (your queries in blue, My response in red).

1) You only own 51% of that mine

AVZ Own 51% of project (but has option to moveto 66%). So lets compare AVZ/LTR (numbers from latest pressos) toget a clearer picture of relative resource value.

1a) Jorc RESERVES:- AVZ 132mt @ 1.63% Li20 vs LTR 68mt @ 1.34% Li20
(So LTR just approx.half the Reserve size of AVZ but LTR @ 17.8% lower grade)

1b) Jorc INFERRED- AVZ 401mt @ 1.65% vs LTR 156mt @ 1.4% Li20
(So LTR onlyhas only about 39% of AVZ Inferred resource defined and LTR is 15% lowergrade )

1c) TARGET Resource: AVZ has an additional 1.1 BT @ 1.5% Li20 vs LTR (is there a target statement for LTR?)

So in my opinion AVZ has superior resource on paper being much larger, higher grade, shallower depth, highly homogenous (with Tin by product) and has a highly likely target “blue sky” resource of further 1.1bt of same or higher grade all this presents as gigantic veins 150-250m true width stating at surface over many km strike length.

Put simply AVZ 51% share of theresource means it currently owns a larger contained Li20 resource than LTR ownat 100% and the AVZ blue sky target is simply next level massive.

The point is owning 51% of something high grade and massive and @ surfacetrumps owning 100% of something medium/large and lower grade and deep even if AVZtransport costs are higher. AVZ transport cost issue may be a moot point given AVZ planned down stream hydroxide production the fact that the DRC Govt wants build a battery manufacturing hub near Manono in country due to massive Cobalt, Lithium, Copper, Tin and abundant clean hydro energy available.

2) The funding that might come is for a 4.5mtmine, not a 10mt mine

The JV funding you refer to for AVZ is proportional.AVZ sold 24% of project to CATH and therefore CATH will be liable for 24% ofdevelopment costs therein whether that be 4.5mt/yr plant or the planned 10mt/yrplant being planned in the revised DFS due early 2022.

CATH are currently committing up toUS$400m (or AU$571m @ currentexchange rates). Much larger than the LTR cap raise value announced 2^ndDec. The remainder of AVZ funding required to get project up will be funded bydebt and is to be provided by African financial institutions this is welladvanced.

I should note the AU$450mt (US$315m) Cap raise LTRannounced is planned to fund construction of mine and the 1^st yearsproduction costs on a much smaller 2.5mt Annual production mine and plant according to the LTR ASX Ann released 2 ^nd Dec. Whereas AVZ smallest production option is 4.5Mt /yr plant which includes an upstream Primary Lithium Sulphate production train. The smaller AVZ start-up 4.5mt Mine output option is almost 2 x LTR’s planned startup production output with the AVZ larger 10mt/yr option being 4x the size of LTR’s Yr 1 output.

3)LTR is not 12-18 mnths behind, we havefunding in the bag and producing QRT 1 2024. You have no funding yet, nowextended till 1 March 2022. In fact i like to suggest we are well ahead of AVZ.

AVZ defined its initial DFS on 21^stApril 2020. LTR defined their DFS in Nov 2021 its about 18 months difference. LTR may have finance however these key milestone put LTR well behind AVZ.

LTR to my knowledge have notcompleted or announced completion of the following:-

a) Environment studies and submittedfor environmental approvals,

b) Plant site and dump/tailings sitesterilisation drilling

c) Water/Hydrology drainage models/studies,

d) Have not sent bulk samples to prospectiveoff takers for testing,

e) Have not completed FEED (Front EndEngineering and Design of plant etc. )

f) Have not gone to tender on mininginfrastructure components and construction or short listed suppliers

g) Have no offtake partners signed

h) Have not completed and submitteda Mining Proposal to WA DMP (Application for a Mining License). See link:- Lodge a mining proposal (dmp.wa.gov.au) . Note: Once submitted there will be a substantial processing time (several months) for the DMP to review the request.

So a), b) and c) need to be done before Mining proposal can be submitted. Also e) and f) need to be completed before construction can start. I doubt that any company would start construction of mine without the commitment of signed offtakes being place as it would present a large and unnecessary risk.

AVZ on the other hand have done theequivalent of all the above and are simply waiting on DRC govt for MiningLicense to be awarded and final part of Finance to be secured (expected any daynow). So LTR may have finance but you can’t begin a plant build without a WA Govt Approved Mining Proposal.

4) AVZ is not about to start construction atall, you have no Finance, no FID, no ML

AVZ is waiting for the DRC Govt toaward Mining License. It takes typically 6mth approx. for the DRC Govt to processand award a Mining License. AVZ ML application was submitted nearly 6 months ago. AVZ have completed all FEED work and have put supply contracts out to tender and have picked suppliers. I expect AVZ to start construction early in 2022 almost immediately on receipt of ML and balance of 100% of Finance.

LTR on the other hand have justcompleted their DFS, have done a cap raise to fund but to my knowledge have notdone the above (See answers to question 3) yet.

5) You don't address the risk that the marketclearly sees

Sure the market saw risk with AVZ whenthe Mcap was back at $200-$300m. AVZ has moved through many project milestones (many more than LTR at time of writing) and with each one is de-risked further. AVZ market cap is now $2.2bill . It would be fair to say the market is happy (and getting happier) with the risk given the rerate AVZ has experienced I expect will continue to disproportionately to experience it going forward. So any perceived the risk has dissipated based on the market response lately.

6) LTR is not a peer to AVZ as LTR operates in the best miningjurisdiction and AVZ in the worst

Itis generally acknowledged that peer companies in the minerals space mine thesame ore type, in this case Spodumene, or have the same end product, SC6, areof similar size/scale, and even listed on the same exchange ie, ASX in this case Both Co’s are domiciled in the same country. Both Companies based in WA.

However,thinking further and deeper I think that when AVZ moves to 10mt /Ann productionand downstream processing, that, at that scale, the equivalent LCE output will be in the range of what SQM produce. So AVZ peers will transition away from the mid sized producers like LTR and PLS to be more like the super producers, the likes of SQL or Ablemarle ETC. So perhaps your right LTR will become less and less a of a peer to AVZ going forward.