Media, page-327

Consolidated comments and responses

OFFTAKE..."No offtake for 80 percent. Why no one interested?"...this is a silly comment because there have been plenty of interested parties. The last project update outlined interest from a variety of counterparties. We will soon see that there are plenty of people with strong interest.

Further CLQ's partner Pengxin has taken a large position in a commodity trading house, and RF has been in contact with the LME.

Selling off-take for cobalt sulfate is not going to be a problem.

Anyway it is putting the horse before the cart, insofar as you have to be certain have a mine producing the stuff before you can be sure of the income.

The conclusion to be drawn is that off-take terms from RF are stiffer than most. Right or wrong, RF has elected to hold out before selling out. It is clear that Easpring wanted more than RF was willing to give to one client.

About 100% offtake. No one but the involved parties knows the precise terms and conditions for the off-take at Sconi. We will not know until income and profits are reported, because the terms are "commercial in confidence".

NAMEPLATE...thanks Flippa for your knowledgeable input. The "exuberance" over nameplate is from
retail investors. One can see from a variety of projects that "nameplate" is simply a theoretical capacity based on the rated capacities of the equipment; it is not a production forecast, and is more often not achieve, than it is fulfilled. With CLQ, there is also the issue of tonnage permits.

My own tendency is to discount the nameplate and production forecasts, not just with CLQ on account of the new process, but because miners have a tendency to be over-optimistic when they are raising money.
However in the case of CLQ, it is my opinion that the upsides on targets, technology, and commodity prices more than offset the skepticism that should be present when evaluating production rates.

EPC...there is no CLQ ann on the subject, but recent events at Ivanhoe Mines indicate to me that CITIC
may be involved at Sunrise. When and if CITIC involvement is announced, I would be anxious to have
informed opinion about their capabilities in EPC and construction.

JUNE ANNOUNCEMENT...many of our most urgent questions and speculations should be answered this week. There are many unresolved issues that have a direct bearing on the BFS which may or may not be included with the BFS: capex and process, off-take, bank debt financing, possible JV on a cathode plant,
EPC, construction timetable.

I am as fully invested as I think prudent. The BFS and investor reaction may disappoint; and maybe CLQ will miss their self-imposed deadline, though I doubt they will.

It is hard to separate one's opinion about the quality of the company with short-term price action on the stock. My opinion is that CLQ is a blue-chip company in disguise, and short-term price action is not going to change my opinion on this, though obviously an increase in the stock price would be more than welcome.