now there's a question fyou...really depends how you define...

now there's a question fyou...

really depends how you define "project", but in any event I don't think you could apply the % complete methodology that KLL and SO4 are currently using. Or if you did it would have to be 0% really, as KLL and SO4 were until they started construction.

DFS, off-takes and finance are outstanding for RWD, as you probably know, but I don't think you can really assign them (and the environmental approval and NT agreement) a weighting in terms of project completion.

All you can say (in my opinion) is that that we've ticked 2 of those 5 key boxes that are probably necessary to confidently start construction (and in reality the off-takes are primarily just a means to getting the finance). But I don't think that's the same as saying that the project (or rather the pre-construction phase) is 40% complete. And if you did take the approach of each box being 20%, there's no doubt lots of work going on in the background such that we're not starting from scratch on the boxes that haven't been ticked yet (clearly not in the case of the DFS anyway, because there's a PFS to work with, plus Bechtel's current workstream etc). But would you ascribe 19% to finance if we were at heads of terms stage, for instance, or should it be 0% until it's actually done and moves straight to 20% (there's a risk of heads of terms not moving to a definitive agreement)?

In short it's not a question I can answer confidently. But it was interesting trying to!