remarkable, page-7

Hello again, Treefers. I just want to comment on your last.
I rather disagree with your assertion:

". . . terms of the Starck contract are that unattractive in today's and even more so in possible future price environments that there is nobody willing to take GIPs position."

I think, out of fairness, it should be said that when the deal was done it was hailed as a company-maker, all we had to do was spend millions, producing a BFS, building a Free Trade Zone, staffing it, satisfying endless environmental concerns, et al. We did all that, didn't we? Meanwhile, the price of Ta2O5 rose and rose, and everything looked rosy. Except for one thing: financiers lost their nerve when the GFC hit, would HCS survive, was the off-take worth a cracker (?) and just when that problem seemed, positively, resolved the political scene deteriorated in Egypt, and here we are, at the end or our tether, for the umpteenth time.
I don't think that there is much wrong with Gippsland's off-take agreement, of course, the price cap is a deterrent but I don't see it as fatal. It is more a question of confidence, IMO, and that is lacking at the moment.
While I'm at it, there are another couple of points to make:
First, Mr. G has suggested, in quite recent conversations and announcements, that discussions with Middle-Eastern and North African financiers are still on foot, we can take a little heart from that, I think.
Second, our Directors, whatever else they may be, are not fools, somebody told me once! They have carried out our side of the bargain to the point where everything is in place and ready to go, we just need the starter (financiers) to fire the gun.