Thanks PieChart. I’m one who likes to hear all sides.Just trying...

Thanks PieChart.

I’m one who likes to hear all sides.

Just trying to breakdown your argument. It feels like we are conflating Security of Demand, Product Price and Cost of Production.

Focus is the Nickel product. But we also produce much more than that.

Security if Demand
As has been repeated many times, including by the Dr, high ESG credentials puts us at the top of buyers baskets. Low ESG producers will sell their wares when the market is short, but potentially not when it is long. We don’t wear that risk - and cost.

Also, we have the upfront agreements for more production than we can produce in the near term.

Product Price
Those agreements tend to be priced higher than spot. This is to ensure security of supply for end buyers. So we will get some hedging of price drops in market.

Worth repeating again, the Dr and others have made it super clear that high ESG credentials don’t drive higher price, just better security of demand.

The main thrust of your argument is on price I think. And that we shouldn’t count on a short market to elevate price levels. This is due to competitive technology and process improvements driving faster supply of product than thought only a few years ago. Fair point.

Cost of Production
If we take your numbers. You have a $10k (AUD or US) cost for HPAL. Where did you get that number please? That is a vital floor price if that is the bulk of market supply.

However, looking at your bearish case QPM is producing at a lower cost per tonne than HPAL. Did I read that right?

If we are the lower cost producer at higher ESG, it will be competitors who need to pull their production in a soft market not us. Agreed?

Conclusion
If we accept much higher demand for high purity Nickel in future. QPM’s offering almost guarantees ongoing Nickel sales through the cycle at a cost lower than nearest competitors.

Even your numbers had us making ~$300m EBITDA in a bearish case.

I don’t think anyone thought QPM would have an open and free market to sell into. There will be a period of price adjustment. Actually I welcome the ID HPAL plants, it lowers the demand destruction from super high prices that would see Nickel stripped from batteries - so reduces a black swan risk for QPM.

I still see a very profitable and viable investment and I don’t see any reason to worry that we’ll get financed if the due diligence goes in our favour because of the influx of ID HPAL higher cost lower ESG producers.

Appreciate you going against the weight of opinion.