The marger happened four and half months ago. So far I haven't read about any management decisions that Allkem management would not have made that would justify a significant share price underperformance compared to a fictional scenario in which Allkem remained independent. Of course they are looking at cost savings opportunities for Sal de Vida and Fenix for example. I remember at least one recent analyst report that was bullish on the forecasted synergies / cost savings in their valuation model. So at least they believe in significant cost savings potential.
@ findinggems, as for Tesla as a "main customer". I knew that Tesla has been a customer of Livent, but I would not say that Tesla is a or the "main customer" for Arcadium Lithium. Allkem already had a well diversified customer base and Livent probably as well, maybe to a lesser extent, not sure about that.
You wrote in regards to Tesla and Arcadium lithium that quote: "Tesla is it's main customer". I do not think that this is true and I have not seen any evidence that would back up this claim.
Chart correlation doesn't mean causation. Yes, to a certain extent Tesla sales underperforming vs. expectations is bad for lithium demand. But a lot of it has to do with massively increased competition especially in China. For the lithium market it doesn't matter wether people buy a Tesla or an EV from another car carmaker. It is irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Tesla still has a market cap of over 500 billion USD. Do you think that if Tesla drops from let's say 600 billion USD market cap to 500 billion USD that then the company Arcadium Lithium would be somehow worth less because of that. I don't understand the logic behind this.
(20min delay)