It's Friday night and I don't know why I bother answering your...

It's Friday night and I don't know why I bother answering your questions Prime1 so I am just picking the last two as they are relatively easy to answer:

Anyways:

3. Should graphite miners go out and learn totally new skills of making and marketing graphene? It's hard to see why they should expect to do better than the existing professionals in the graphene business. Vertical integration might sound good, but it demands that management talent be spread across different businesses.

AXE doesn't make graphene - the university researchers did. So in other words, it is more than likely that "existing professionals in the graphene business" will make the graphene. AXE supplies the graphite from which graphene is made from.

If you follow Lomiko Metals (TSX-V:LMR) you will note that they partnered with graphene labs to produce graphene, much like what AXE has done in this case.

4. AXE's graphite production will be vastly larger than the total demand for graphite from graphene producers. The bulk of production therefore must be sold in traditional graphite markets. So isn't it logical to focus on them first?

Who said AXE was solely focused on graphene? In the alternative, who said AXE was not focused on traditional graphite markets?

They just made an announcement that graphene has been made from their graphite. They didn't just make an announcement saying: "Graphene has been made from our product, and from now our product will only be used for graphene".

If there is evidence to the contrary, happy to be proven wrong Prime1. Of course, if AXE did decide to ONLY do graphene, I would be pulling a few hairs out and questioning management strategy.