Not Gunna Be Enough Lithium, page-2511

Yeah what is amazing is that there is not a single mention of EMH/foreign investor consideration in any of the documented/detailed JTF notes. I honestly do not see any EMH participation in this project post delivery of the definitive feasibility study. We spoke about it before and I maintain that once the final DFS (whatever form/shape that may end up taking, see below) is delivered - there will be a notice of immediate takeover/buyout from our majority partner.

If anyone has doubts think about this:

In those JTF notes there is a mention of the Cinovec Project being a 'matter of national significance' what this hints at is this: matters of national importance cannot and will not be owned by a random microcap stock from Australia. I believe EMH shareholders will be hearing that sentiment more and more especially considering that Geomet will be receiving JTF funds for the portion of the project, and I am certain the opposition will 'spin' those news to hypothesize that those funds are being syphoned to Australia.

What we may see with those staggered dates that the JTF minutes provide ("2. final feasibility study - 24H1/24H2/25H1") is as follows:

1. 24H1 - EMH will release Mine DFS, as there are no changes to that part of the project from the Prunerov location change.
2. 24H2 - EMH will release Ore Transfer Facility / Dukla Industrial DFS, there are some medium-size DFS changes but nothing DRA can't update over duration of 9 months (reduction in stockpile areas size, addition of a train station, addition of a loading facility)
3. 25H1 - EMH will release Processing Plant DFS, major layout changes, new design constraints, IO modelling, unloading/loading facility and EIA studies will need to be developed etc.

I personally think that there is very, very slim chance that the above hypothesis is actually true, however I just do not get why there are 3 dates provided.

Another point: remember that DRA, when they were first engaged, were meant to finish DFS in under a year. With the proposed dates it almost appears that they are starting from scratch, which I find hard to believe. So why 150% duration increase for an existent study that only needed an update (significant at that, but not 150% significant)?

Anyways, it is all smoke and mirrors, at least they keep us the LTHs somewhat entertained, you just never know what EMH/Geomet/CEZ may do (well they surely not letting the shareholders know what the gameplan is).