General comments/chat, page-1080

Not sure your point here, but lets start with something different like lithium. Now, Greenbushes started as a tin mine, diverged into spodumene and now its JV is going to be producing hydroxide in WA *beenthe higher valued commodity).

Now lets go to MIN and PLS - both started with DSO, moved to spodumene (obviously) but both are now moving/examining/proposing the next step been hydroxide production. That is they start low, then expand, then move to higher value whilst seeking to limit dilution by raising cash from initial operations. It is what companies should be doing to have control of their resource through the development cycle.

ADN simply wants to start with low hanging fruit to get the cash flow to move to HPA, noting they can't move to HPA in the now because the demand gap is forecast a few years down the track. What that means is ADN needs to progress to HPA, not start at HPA, because its HPA will not be needed until 2022/23 IMO (and hence why I linked the embedded posts in my post).

Good strategy is what I can say - get yourself to market by exploiting your short term opportunities, get some cash flow, and then move to higher valued product (which is a natural extension of your actual deposit not anything new) when the opportunity arises.

I personally wish Australia wasn't just a dig it and export country and then buy back higher valued product (i.e. look at iron ore, we export iron ore and thermal coal and gas for power generation to China and buy back steel, noting the higher cost structures in steel is actually capex not opex driven costs like labour given steel plants are very capital intensive). ADN and other plays which have a value adding strategy in Australia should be applauded IMO.

All IMO