sabine, credit to you for acknowledging (by replying when not...

sabine, credit to you for acknowledging (by replying when not named) that some of your posts have things in common with behaviour to which I was referring. However:
(a) it's incorrect to say that I deflected from what you now describe as:
"- are current prices sustainable ?

- how long is it likely to be before news comes that will will lift them again?
- what might this news be?";
(b) it's incorrect and inappropriate to make the mischievous comments that I've noted below.
Without rereading what you said, I don't recall you clearly articulating those questions; but perhaps they were buried among unhelpful tone. If you want people to offer substantive answers (1) don't misquote them, especially in a disparaging way, and (2) do offer - to the best of your ability, even if limited - substantive posts for assessment in the forum.

Clearly, you failed to properly read what I said:

• The question "are current prices sustainable ?" is ambiguous. If you mean lithium prices then the answer depends on the time frame but it's clear from the context that I think "yes" in the foreseeable future since I said "The demand from Europe for local lithium will be extraordinary". Since price results from supply and demand and demand will exceed supply according to the opinions of experts (I'll leave Lowry out of this) then my answer was obvious without spelling it out in dog-cat-mouse language. If you have a considered opinion why not offer it, with supporting data.
• You say I also failed to answer the question "how long is it likely to be before news comes that will will lift them again?"but again you're wrong. After giving relevant background I said "I wouldn't be surprised if we get offtake agreements fairly soon." Clearly that would "lift them" again - as could several other things. So what's you substantiated answer to your own question?
• Your last question "what might this news be?" - see previous answer. What do you think the next news might be that will lift them?

Why would you think I would critique Lowry's comments? He has his own agenda and I've chosen to not give that more oxygen - if that's OK with you. However here's some feedback for you. IMO, your approach will rarely get you significant information or much support. As illustrated above:
(1) after posting repeatedly and in a carping manner on a stock that you don't own (which can't be that rewarding in the long term)...
(2) you then didn't properly read my posts...
(3) yet you went on to make unsubstantiated, negative and incorrect assertions about my intentions, of which you know nothing - and you were wrong about them to.

You said (referring to my last post):

• "You might not care about these matters as you sound like a long term ‘long view’ holder...but what about the folk who bought back on January 19 ?..."
  That's utter nonsense - mischievous rubbish that you've just made up. I never said anything of the sort. Your post should be deleted for unsubstantiated 'information'.
• "You think none of those kinds of people [mums & dads] bought in in the recent pump?Or that none of them matter ? Again, I've said nothing of the sort. That's more mischievous rubbish that you've just made up. Your post should be deleted for unsubstantiated 'information' on that ground, too.
• Instead of elitist sneers at ‘s0re losers...’

Yet again, I've said nothing of the sort. Get out of your victim mode, stop making things up and withdraw your misleading post which should be deleted as being unsubstantiated on this ground too.