Lithium Boom, page-45

@john_utah

in reference to your post here https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/50536963/single

John,.

You (John_Utah) wrote as in link above:

“__I think you're being disingenuous to be honest.

Saying JORC is required for any research or stats FFX holders wish to use but then saying that same requirement doesn't apply when referring to AVZ.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, unless you are being disingenuous and the only reason you are here is to ruffle a few feathers.I think you're being disingenuous to be honest.

Saying JORC is required for any research or stats FFX holders wish to use but then saying that same requirement doesn't apply when referring to AVZ.

You can't have your cake and eat it too, unless you are being disingenuous and the only reason you are here is to ruffle a few feathers.__”

my reply:

Manono can not claim 1.65% in the DFS footnote if it’s not real from MET tests. For JOrC reporting they would have to say it’s a target of not confirmed. The 1.65% head grade is more a calculation than the original calculated estimation 1.58%, because it’s based on more testwork.

Rather the MET testing is done by who? and what did they report? 1.65%.

I can see PLL applied a more robust representation of ore sampling for the LOM not first 5 years but staggered over LOM, ranging from beginning middle and end.

What PLL does, seems to underscore the doubts about the FFX 1.75% ROS for first 5 years of LOM when head grade is 1.51%. (Still waiting for a genius to tell me how to understand that deviation),
And how first 5 years can be transposed for next 15 years??

This is another reason indicated / probable category does not make up for measured / proven. FFX for its geologically heterogenous Deposit, will have a huge learning curve just like WA lithium (ex Talisons due to grade and homogeneity/consistency of ore)

......1.75% to 1.51% seems quite all over the place

Lastly, anyone who thinks moisture management is Not an issue, like Ubi, will need to look at PLS latest Qtrly ok moisture management activity —who btw, do not employ 100% froth flotation but only a fraction of the coarse feed.— So 100% flotation, is guaranteed to be 5 times more an issue here than it is for PLS, simply due to scale.



Anyone who wants to rep ly, should do so on the more relevant thread