Indeed they are more relevant to "valuation" discussion than a...

Indeed they are more relevant to "valuation" discussion than a "share price" discussion but I answered a question posed in the other thread. IMO you've grasped the content of those posts very well so I'll continue dialogue the dialogue along the points raised:

1. Location. Duly noted. IMO WA spodumene producers have the exact same location disadvantage as Namibia. Also we are now seeing large LiOH plants being built in WA by the SC6 miners to give them the chemical refining capacity.

I'm not cautious on Namibia ... just wouldn't give the resource a premium as compared to a resource with "nearology" to the real end customer. We are witnessing all kinds of tie ups between Auto OEMs, Battery Manufacturers, Chemical Refiners and Miners. So I am comparing them to say SAY or PLL or Nemaska for instance. What I can say absolutely would be just a Low Grade Namibian Concentrate producer would not get a dime of my money. LPD has the mine/refiner strategy with some unique aspects that are appealing.

2. Resource. So far we have a low grade resource in that we are shipping a concentrate of just 3.23% Li. LPD chemical plants needs ~11.6 tonnes of concentrate as input to get a tonne of LiOH versus the typical spodumene SC6 that only requires ~6.5 tonnes. Sure P2P could be fed from other sources (as could any LiOH plant) but why do that. Co-locate the mine and refinery and get a battery maker in the mix too. Might as well export batteries out of Walvis Bay. There are many Africa lithium hard rock deposits.

3. Noted ... I mean what else do we expect them to say? Your observation on input costs such as sulfuric acid is a good one.

4. Like I replied to ThePennyChemist, options abound from UAE but its still shipping to a Battery Maker somewhere ... OK China or maybe more broadly Asia or turn the ship around to the Suez and into Europe who have a whole "Battery Passport" program to advantage "green goods" by minimizing trips. Neutral to UAE as P2P location ... I think they may be able to do better.

5. I agree ... which is why I called them (Rub + Cae) co-products. Vital to the project. Appreciate that you are trying to shift the view to the higher value medium of specialty chemical company ... LPD can grow into that as they prove the tech commercially. BASF we are not (yet).

6. Maybe so ... but its very important to me. Even at this early stage I see LPD has an advantage. Hopefully at FEED it improves further.

Good discussion. Thank you.