ree demand destruction is a myth

This concept seems to be rather controversial and diametrically opposed viewpoints appear to be equally controversial. That said, I think worthwhile discussion would be valuable and beneficial to all. I have stated openly that I am of the opinion that REE demand destruction (and the resulting would-be effect on Lynas) is mythological (like Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy).

There is a wikipedia page specifically on this topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand_destruction

I have laboured the point and asked for any who can provide conclusive evidence that there is structural decline or permanency in the decline of demand for REE. I do not think the "demand destruction" viewpoint has merit.

This does not seem to be readily available. I do not believe that citing widely available information on reduction in application usage of Ce (one of over two dozen REE) and recycling of REE on a small scale as adequate proof that REE have suffered demand destruction.

In fact evidence that REE demand is growing and will continue to grow is readily available and directly contradicts the so-called REE demand destruction myth.

Would anyone know of any hard data that is available (rather than supposed expert viewpoints) that show that historical or future REE demand and supply numbers are permanent and in structural decline and how this may affect Lynas?

Cheers and good luck to all.