LIVE & FREE livestream of company presenting at RIU Explorers Conference today (Tuesday), page-12

No disputing that A4N has earned its MC. It has its commercial partnerships and is developing its customer base. That doesn't mean however that IPT will not also find a place in the market.

And best of luck to IPT in that endeavour; it will be a long, hard, expensive road turning itself from a one-man explorer operation into a chemicals business. I am not surprised the doctor is talking up A4N; it's important for the HPA industry in Aus that they find success. Otherwise, you may end up with a Kallium Lakes Potash situation, which would be no good for anyone.

Lake Hope has its own unique attributes which confer advantages.

I'm still trying to work those out, so I'm keeping a keen eye on IPT. But I'm yet to be convinced that mining a lake for HPA out bush is somehow better than a process that is near zero waste, can be done using readily available feedstocks, all available next to a major port, that's repeatable anywhere in the world. Why mine when you don't need to - it's not like there aren't plenty of pebbles in Australia we need to mine.

The demand for HPA will be large enough for both companies.

People say that over on the A4N boards also, I'm not convinced, but time will tell.

Anyway, I was more curious why you suggested the two companies, which are at completely different stages of their stories, should have a similar MC.

Best of luck to all.