They can't refute them. Nor offer an intelligent counter...

They can't refute them. Nor offer an intelligent counter argument. You are correct that it is not a Halloysite deposit. But, in fairness to the company they have not referred to it as such. They call it a Halloysite-kaolin deposit.
But that's just as bad. Nowhere in the industry do you see it referred to that. Except here. And the other dudes who are trying to copy this that often show up here.
You are also correct that, so far, no-one has separated halloysite from kaolin. Certainly not in a commercial way.
You are also correct that due to the nature of the ore body, a guaranteed consistency of "x" % of halloysite per tonne of kaolin will be near on impossible. Thats why these deposits are not that special. The end user buys kaolin, then ads Halloysite (mostly from NZ where it runs at 90%+) to the kaolin so it is measured. Do you know what this near pure Halloysite sells for? less than $1500/t and in most cases less than $1000/t
know how much they sell? less than 10,000t per year. Why? Because thats the level of demand in the market.
Funny how the only "real" (and i use that word in the most loosest of terms) is from a paint and coatings market. A platy kaolin and nothing to do with the halloysite. When all the talk for the last year has been on the Halloysite side of things....strange hey.

You are also correct that BASF are a big Industrial Minerals player. if they are for sale for $200M the value of ADN compared to that, is crazy.

all of this is crazy and doesn't make much sense to me.