@brad1601 This is all rather silly tbh, everyone clearly...

@brad1601
This is all rather silly tbh, everyone clearly understands what you are saying in terms of selling something for less than it costs to produce is not a great way to make money lol.. but it's a totally moot point here that you're hammering on for some reason.

With selling 113ktpa at US$900/t to PLL and the remaining spod at current market prices (say US$6000/t) it's safe to say NAL will be making a substantial profit per tonne produced. Even if we were selling all our production at only $900/t we would still be in the money.

Just actually read the PFS... and remember the prices that were used back then, which were very conservative even at the time, then think.


Now what others have said in terms of no debt and already paid for; what they mean is that the capital expenditure (capex) is mostly all already accounted for and paid, all the equipment and upgrade and labour and time to do that has all been paid for already - mostly as noted in the recent December quarterly report issued this week. That is why the outlay was high, because we've just paid to upgrade and restart a full scale 220ktpa lithium concentrator plant. So, now moving forward it is operating costs that we have to cover, and as you can see, these are clearly more than covered just with our sale price to PLL alone.

I hope that helps explain and puts this rather daft little argument to bed. Remember, if we reach full production capacity this year, that is 113ktpa selling at say US$6000/t so US$678m (or A$948m) plus the US$101m from PLL sales.

I think we're going to be ok buddy