Yes @Logzy it is enormously frustrating and understandable that some holders have lost patience over the years, but I believe that much "has come of it" and that many have "jumped at the chance of locking us in," both in regards to funding and offtake.
Sometime last month I think it was, @Charterrierist mentioned the importance of the midstream (as @jaydee74 regularly reminds us of too, as does Benchmark Minerals Intelligence) and therefore believes Lepidico to be in the driver's seat. I really, emphatically, whole heartedly concur. Underline, bold font.
IMO our management are very savvy operators, not just scientifically with our tech, but economically. Our chairman and our CEO both have decades of success, navigating the business world's treacherous waters, and have shareholders' and therefore their own, best interests at heart.
Tossing my 2 cents into our HC unofficial tipping comp on the potential order of our upcoming announcements: I believe JW is securing the absolute best deal he can for us, knowing he has the leverage to do so. The DFC funding I recall as being at very low rates, so that would logically be the first one to secure, before locking in others. Given our tech's specs and the growing demand for our product, I imagine there is no shortage of options available to us. Paraphrasing @Charterrierist again who answered "everywhere," when someone asked where will the money come from? The DFC's independent engineer has been appointed, we just need to wait till the US gov's boxes are all ticked.
As an aside, long term holders have seen that our management are careful to maintain autonomy, avoiding takeover risk or any large player holding too much sway in our future decisions or profits. I'm pleased Galaxy is off our register and would rather not be subsumed by an industry behemoth, if one was to offer taking a large stake in our company, be they Tier 1 or whoever. It reassures me that GJ's Strategic Metallurgy holds more than 6%.
Same as the above for our offtake. In our last quarterly, we were told "Lithium supply discussions are now being prioritised with three consumers." Management didn't say 3 companies are interested in our products. The sentence says they have narrowed it down to 3 customers, presumably ones that offer us not only the best offtake price, but an expansive future of further possibilities. The Strategic Metallurgy team have not persevered for 8 years, adding JW to their crew, to head down a cul de sac.
Besides, initially we'll only have P1, therefore not much product to spread around. Wherever it ends up, I'm sure it will be gratefully received by the purchaser and profitably so for us. Just on pricing alone, with the figures @Bayhunter and @ljcamp posted today for LiOH and spodumene, the agreements signed will be with this increasing heat in the market. Given that we won't even have offtake product for a year and a half, we will achieve better terms presently and going forward than we would have last month or last year.
We were told in the quarterly the Tier 1 needs a large sample, thus the decision to upgrade our pilot plant to 25 kg/ph from 15 kg/hr for a 2 week steady state campaign, which is 8,400 kg, then ship it to wherever the Tier 1's plant is. As of the end of June, SM had received proposals for the upgrades. How long to upgrade? Then 2 weeks to process. How long on a ship? How long for the Tier 1 or their CAM manufacturer to experiment with all these tonnes? So, during the upcoming quarter seems like a reasonable time frame, as management have suggested.
@Naughtpatjoe mentioned a week or 2 ago that Perth labs were seeing 8-10 week delays, which explains why we haven't received our assay results in August as expected. So, as has been the case for years, if holders are here for the long term, patience is still required, with further (temporary) opportunity to add to our holdings, at prices that I believe will be laughable in the not too distant future. Monday? Who knows. Whenever those announcements start to drop. If holders are here for quick profits, there are multiple opportunities to trade LPD's many pips up and down, so each to their own, I guess. Not financial advice.
With all this mystery and secrecy, one of the many things that puzzle me is why, how can binding offtake discussions with 4 separate consumers for rubidium and caesium all result in agreements being finalised by the end of this quarter, which is now in the next 3 weeks? Why not one in early July, one in late September, etc? As management announced in our last quarterly, why all 4 in a lump? What does the signing hinge on? Just another unanswerable question, as we're all standing on the other side of the closed door.
Again, sorry this is so long, but I hope some part of it helps @Logzy. Last year wasn't easy for me either, when our share price hit the ridiculous lows I bought in on nearly 6 years ago, but I rest easily now, as smoke is coming from everywhere and we're nearing goal posts. Over the weekend, I'll post a couple of other things that have come up that may ease others' minds, as they have mine.
LPD Price at posting:
2.5¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)