Ah......could be a lot of things like I previously stated in my...

Ah......could be a lot of things like I previously stated in my post. But 3 months past due on when the MD stated it would be out , I cant' really see a reasonable explanation as to why this may be the case as there has been ample time to iron out the kinks and look at the various options at both NAL and Authier.

Could be something flowing on from the Livent / Pallinghurst agreement to exchange their interest in NAL for an interest in Livent , but it could also be that Pallinghurst wants to do something else different in the interim period while they wait for Livent and I.Q NAL to develop further.

But one needs to consider everything really. I mean most people wouldn't probably realize that in some jurisdictions a significant ' De-watering ' of a previous operating mine can attract a separate EIS just to complete that part of ' re-starting ' a pre-existing operating mine.

And remember when good ole tongue wagging Laliberte who actually went on the public record to the media early after the closing of the NAL acquisition that ' de-watering ' would be required after such a long period of idleness .

So how's that all worked out I wonder . Where has the considerable melt of previous winters ended up going. Remember none of this has even been recorded in the last couple of quarterlies so I guess there can be a lot of unanswered questions which only result in the Market speculating unnecessarily over.

And I think that is what Yika is more ore less eluding to. Just some of these issues hanging about.