LIVE & FREE livestream of company presenting at RIU Explorers Conference today (Tuesday), page-13

Luck never goes astray.

The way I see things A4N and IPT will have totally different trajectories as businesses.

A4N is clearly going down the path of a technology company with its model being one of value add. IPT is destined to be a supplier of a basic commodity. Each company (I think) has intrinsic strengths to play to.

The value proposition for IPT is low cost production (assuming it can indeed produce a 4n final product) which, as MJ points out, is essential for a successful commodity supplier. It is not a fancy business model but the economics (on scoping study estimation) look robust. Your comparison with potash extraction from brine is not at all apt. The problems of temperature sensitivity in deriving a final product do not apply to the production of HPA.

One quibble with your assertion that A4N's business model is "repeatable anywhere in the World". A4N enjoys local synergies with Orica and Rio. The technology can certainly be established elsewhere but the cost benefits are a one off for A4N.

Assuming IPT does demonstrate it has the capability to profitably produce a 4n HPA final product it will be a much lower risk company than A4N going forward.

A4N's business model of entering into the production of synthetic sapphire has both execution risk and technology risk. Technology is developing and changing all of the time (witness the transition away from Nickel in EV battery tech as an example) and A4N will need to constantly employ a quality team of developers in order for their offering to always be relevant. It can be a highly lucrative business model but it has intrinsic recurring financial and developmental expenses which can not be taken for granted or abrogated.