Good question. It’s all about risk v reward. Ultimately, all we...

Good question.

It’s all about risk v reward. Ultimately, all we shareholders and stakeholders care about is is the potential for profits and the sooner they come the better.

Going the extra step to coat PSG is a path that involves another level of risk that I believe is unnecessary for us at this point in time. Here’s why.

Producing graphite concentrates is a low-cost margin game. This is where RNU has a huge advantage having 100% control of a low-cost feedstock in a low sovereign risk country (security for the supply chain). Not only are we blessed having found a resource located in a Tier1 jurisdiction like South Australia, it also has an unique flat flying, one continuous ore body. Therefore, we will make money but not the huge profits everyone would like especially at the current graphite concentrate price. If concentrate was all that RNU did they could potentially undercut everybody in the game bar China but only if graphite prices increase substantially (incidentally, in a consciously ESG responsible world, China may find its costs increasing regardless). However, by RNU going just one step further to purify and produce PSG there are much greater profits to be made. So by stopping at that point reduces risks and the potential for shareholder rewards increases substantially.

If you already have a low cost mine concentrate operation that you can feed into the PSG side of the operation then you’ll have made a profitable business. Good luck to all the other wannabes if they can make going the extra step work for them (BTW they need to). However, at RNU when you’ve got the goods don’t complicate.

It’s the old KISS principle. However, once in operation and making money RNU may them decide to up the ante.

DYOR, All IMO, GLTA(Patient)H