TU Warnie - that sounds about right in terms of the...

TU Warnie - that sounds about right in terms of the technicalities.

Clearly it is not in MK's interests to activate this if TOL is in limbo (and the question of whether that really constitutes a non-approval event in any case is one for lawyers only I imagine. I would suggest the clause was not designed for "in limbo" eventualities and generally legal definitions often come down to intention where vagueness is inherent IMO)

MK are not in this to take Lynas to the cleaners. Lynas have total faith in the MK agreement and complete trust in them. If MK exercise the clause, they lose money, period, (whilst limiting complete loss in the event of a TOL rejection.) MK make substantial amounts of money if the TOL is issued. Think about it for 2.05 seconds and you realise there is no chance MK would even attempt to exercise the clause if TOL remains undecided mid-Oct. I repeat Lynas made it clear to me yesterday that they have no expectation that the circumstance will arise, based upon the schedule they referred to in their email to me. They left no doubt.

The 200m shorts on issue have a very limited window of opportunity before an announcement that Lynas have initiated the heating process for the kiln, whether this is next Wednesday, or whenever it occurs. Once the smaller end of shortsville go (Warnie?) then it become exponential. Can anyone calculate the effect on the SP of 200m shorts covering before the TOL is even issued?