Thanks for clearing it up, as I wasn't being clear in my earlier...

Thanks for clearing it up, as I wasn't being clear in my earlier post. My intention was not to compare the mineral resources and reserves of these miners as they refer to different things. I was trying to illustrate that mineral resources alone are not accurate comparison of these 3 magnesium players as they are at different stages of their respective projects, with E25 being the most mature. Mineral reserves estimations generally get reported during the feasibility studies, as EMN and FRB are yet to complete theirs, thus no mineral reserve figure to compare. Having a high mineral resources equate to high potential, having high mineral reserves is like having high 'realisable' potential.

Also when I refer to studies, I am not only referring to the study report but the undertaking of it.

For those not familiar with the terms, mineral resources are what's in the ground and mineral reserves is what's deemed economically mineable.

Always DYOR