@boslo I would argue that HIOs problem is that it was a lot of...

@boslo I would argue that HIOs problem is that it was a lot of money to begin with, in that any blowouts are likely to be big blowouts. A $2b AUD capex is gargantuan especially if there is no way to scale up to this level. HIOs capex to NPV was almost 100% - this is a big problem in it's own right - the current environment just makes it untenable (it was always going to be a massive uphill battle from an economics and financing perspective).

In regards to Galan, if we go with a capex of 60% of the HMW PEA for the Chloride approach (as hinted by JP) this gives us a very respectable 15.5% Capex to NPV using a 15k US Lithium Chloride price. As bombers points out this is the beauty of this project in this environment - it's low technical risk, low capex, low opex, and scalable PLUS Lithium prices continue to run up off the charts with no sign of slowing (even if they dropped by 50% I could care less).

Notice that even after the dramatic reduction in share prices of ADN, HIO and CYM, GLN still offers superior value (referring to the "% of PE (Diluted)" column).

In this environment your project economics need plenty of buffer - one thing we have here (if nothing else) is plenty of buffer in our project economics from pretty much every dimension (including capex considerations).