Pertinent market/industry news/articles, page-1109

the scoping study addresses your questions about why they selected pricing they did, and the strategy is clear re final product - further studies will be done,  in parallel with conversations with prospective partners, to determine the best way forward. I.e. there hasn't yet been a decision on what the final product will be. Note they flag the potential for a staged approach, say msp initially, then sulphates later.

Re neutraliser, From memory they are looking to design the mining pit wall to include neutraliser which is present in the mining envelope, and they estimate a net benefit. We are waiting for confirmation on this. The company has shown it can produce battery grade sulphate and extensive test work has been done including historically by Vale Inco. Are you suggesting that all of this historical work and our recovery estimates are incorrect? Because we forgot to consider the impact neutraliser will have? 

Note BHP has historically been a major shareholder in our deposit and reading between the lines on ours and their presentations, are still in conversation.

Ian Buchorn is widely credited with finding these deposits, but you suggest someone else is? Can you share some links?

You may have noticed we haven't finalised a partner for the project because we aren't willing to rush into a deal. Our cash position combined with a professionally managed process via kpmg is working in our favor when you consider some of the awkward deals and capital raises being done by others.