Dunny wrote:So your most recent thesis revolves around a...

Dunny wrote:

So your most recent thesis revolves around a screenshot of part of an email, that wasn't sent to you?

I can add Rodney Hooper and KDR’s Donohue’s commentary as well, and also analyst commentary on anything unusual gets discounted (but last was Kris aimed at EU lithology)

A screenshot of part of an email that yourself and a couple of acquaintances are using to try and discredit the company here and on other social media?

I think it’s important to retain perspective rather than a echo chamber of self confirming opinions. As you can see the post was about Ozblue’s claims, not the company per se. So obviously you’re not genuinely engaging my critique here. All I’ve done is looked at what the Company has said and the information gaps. If you don’t like Socratic dialogue I suggest you move to PRC etc...

So who are we to believe? Some disgruntled non holders concerned that the success of this company may impact their chosen investment? Or the actual company itself that has refuted these claims (see webinar presentation) and is currently proceeding with big players who actually know what is important that are currently going over the finer details.

This is not a church of believing, nor is your premises above valid . To talk of believing, the company made shareholders believe the scoping study for downstream processing was coming out with the DFS as it was subject to inputs from the DFS to be furnished. But the scoping study still didn’t come out. And only later in the Quarterly are some reasons given, including yes yes, yes, the confirmatory testwork that mysteriously was never mentioned as part of Hatch Engineering’s work. The company via the Doc, just skirted the topic of metallurgy, didn’t introduce a metallurgist to refute or clarify the amenability to BATTERY GRADE FEEDSTOCK, and all this on a platform FFX controls and pays for. So I don’t see a valid refutation in the video. I just see a bit of contempt for retail shareholders discussing the stock.


Yourself (and acquaintances) have actually made me and others bother to ask around to see if this is potentially an issue. All I'll say is that these claims are laughable and I am more than comfortable this is far from even a potential issue.

I can’t engage an undefined “this” or these “claims”. Try a little harder. Just a bluff. Please don’t waste my time and others.

The continued hearsay is absolute nonsense and I'll refer you back to the webinar where the chairman was extremely strongly spoken regarding these types of posts regarding these matters and I can only assume that was directed primarily at yourself.

Again, “these types”, “these matters”—“absolute nonsense”—- all indefined judgments

I'm looking forward to this being proved to be a non issue when this project has a clear path to production soon enough, backed by actual experts who actually know. Obviously only when they put their money and reputation on the line is when we will be able to call you out on all of this, so for the time being there is no point in anyone bothering.
A “non-issue” —yep another undefined non-commttal non-engaging judgment.
Did you actually read my post? Just in case —I do think another method will be used. If not then why no scoping study showing at least confirmatory testwork. I have not seen one answer to that.

But I'm very much looking forward to whatever potential issue you and your cronies come up with next. I thought a screenshot of part of Ron's email was perhaps a little beyond crazed conspiracy theorist level to base all of this on, however nonetheless looking forward to seeing the next plan of attack pop up soon enough once this one starts to fade.

Of course you should expect a reply showing issue, you have only engaged superficially the content discussed, and 90 out of 100 posts are no different from focussing on WHO not WHAT, the cardinal sin of Feudalism and tribalism