Ended up getting a response from Andy who authored the article. Had quite a constructive dialogue.
He agreed that the representation of Mt Cattlin was not accurate for its current state whereby it is well known that it has exceeded name plate as of July 2017.
His comments in the article were more in reference to the fact that Mt Cattlin ended up fulfilling the 2016 contract a few months the later than promised in early 2017, and that any new producers will not be having it easy going forward. His point was that "ALL new/restart mines are subject to slippage".
He will be including an update on Mt Cattlins improved performance on his next column of lithium supply.
Hope this helps all LT holders.
Any further feedback should be directed to Andy:
[email protected]
M92
