Honestly from my interpretation it looks like we are just trying...

Honestly from my interpretation it looks like we are just trying to dress Barrambie up in a bow to make it more attractive to buy off our hands by trying to add the flavor of the month gold, to the deal. Also ass covering so that if a Boddington or something similar ends up being on the same lease shareholders don't see it as a misstep like mount Marion.

The above comments Aren't necessarily a criticism either. However I do see it as somewhat of an admission that "Hey, we know we are stuck for near term cashflow so we need to do something while we wait"

A few more interesting things I took away from the agm were at least 90% of the historical assays of gold on the Barrambie tenement were from a depth of less than 60 meters. So if found to be economic it would likely be very suited to open pit mining with low strip ratios. And historical assays are being retested with more modern processes and I think also multi element ( could be wrong on this point though). That being said even if something good turns up it seems like it would only be ever used as leverage to sell at a higher price. Which again I'm not opposed to, As long as fair value was achieved and shareholders see some benefit. I guess you could always do it with some sort of low percentage royalty to make sure if it does become bigger than expected you retain some free upside protection.

I think the above is the preferred option rather than NMT pivot to try and take anything to mining stage ( not that they suggested the would, They have suggested the exact opposite) as otherwise the register would be blown to pieces while trying to go through all the stages of discovery and approvals etc to get it all going. Just mentioning for discussions sake.

The only other one thing worth mentioning is a member of the audience asked Chris If NMT was generating cashflow as a direct response to Chris saying that OEM's in Europe are currently paying Primobius to recycle batteries. The answer ( not a direct quote as I can't remember the exact words used) was no but the point was also danced around in a way that I wasn't thrilled about. I'm guessing as there is market sensitive information involved and perhaps the money is directly being reused or poured straight back in to refining and improving the process. That is definitely speculation on my behalf but it would be nice to have a clearer picture as to why if Primobius is generating revenue that there is no follow through to NMT, and how is that likely to change in the future?

Either way it again appeared like there is now near term cashflow coming to NMT, So while the talk was its been a hard year this year but we've trimmed down the company and the board is determined to bring share holders value, I can't actually see it bringing any meaningful rise to the SP and in fact I'm still predicting that it will erode back down to the lows of this year or lower over the next 6-12 months. I hope i'm wrong and the spot price of lithium has found a bottom and caries up with it but it is not my base case.

Oh yeah, and for what its worth there was no mention of the ongoing court case and unfortunately no one asked the question on the day either. I was busy juggling other things whilst listening in so didn't have the ability to ask it myself, although I suspect had the question been asked it would have been met with a " we can't comment" or something similar anyway.