Ok that potentially, note I use the word potentially, crystallises an issue for me of the other day as to why LTR - Post #:
42977372 - have stated 100% floatation is an option to the traditional combined DMS/floatation model when you have high grade and stated low Fe203 count, with large coarse spodumene (noting LTR has not given information out about Mica in METs btw). Lepidolite and mica can skew a process closer to floatation product, but still suspect the LTR process will be using a combined DMS/floatation IMO.
Full METs will be interesting I guess for LTR, as having large coarse crystals (which LTR has stated in the past) is more receptive to combined DMS/flotation options IMO for achieving 80% recovery rates than relying on floatation alone (given the high opex costs associated with flotation recovery when compared to DMS).
Anyway, interesting, but in terms of AVZ doesn't appear to be any issues with its METs as I posted the other day.
@JasmineTea you can't be serious in your Post #:
43165707 that people will struggle to find money to convert the options given how much they are in the money compared to the heads price at this stage. Who would (and what percentage of people do you consider would let the May 2020 options expire when they are so much in the money at this stage??? That view is strange at best.
All IMO