share price move, page-61

Thanks @RockstarJones,

Thanks for this - good to put figures on the table to remind people of what we're looking at.

Couple of things to add:

The Nickel and the Manganese are also worth and enormous amount. The scoping study results will soon allow us to calculate this with better accuracy - i.e just how much sits in the 'enriched manganese zone'.

The expected addition of the Creasy tenement means a lot more than good contacts in the industry, it will bring a much better economy of scale to the project. If this JV occurs the resource gets 50% bigger in size, but the plant cost won't be anywhere near 50% more expensive. Thus OPEX will be dramatically reduced - each kg of cobalt will be cheaper. Thus the project will be viable at a lower Cobalt price - if it drops again down the track.

The main thing for me is that Mt Thirsty is currently being evaluated by commentators in a way that does not compare apples to apples. Thirsty is compared to others by resource size divided by MCAP, and guessing that the CAPEX will be similar for all resources. But this is not the case. If Mt Thirsty's current scoping can show that their low CAPEX ($65mil Vs $600-$800Mil) approach is viable then the game changes considerably. If you were a Chinese battery company looking for a junior who could be producing quickly, a $65Mil CAPEX would be very, very appealing (and then there is the shallow depth, no ned for blasting, all the handy infrastructure, the location etc etc etc!).

Let's see what happens,

Solarbat