In the original JV deal, TTC picked up an exclusive right to...

In the original JV deal, TTC picked up an exclusive right to sell product from the phase 1 project for a 10 year period. The terms were confidential as you can expect, but it became clear enough over time that it was an agency arrangement for a percentage fee (My interpretation - transparent to the JV if not necessarily controlled by the JV)

In the recent placement to Toyota, TTC have gained rights over phase 2 output as reported in the announcement
Orocobre and Toyota Tsusho have also agreed that Toyota Tsusho will be appointed as exclusive sales agent for Phase 2 (in addition to Phase 1) with Orocobre and Toyota Tsusho having joint control over strategic marketing, the allocation of volume to customers and commercial terms
Significantly, ORE now have involvement in where the product goes and under what terms. I think there were enough good behaviour incentives in the developing relationship and the growing lithium market that it is unlikely that the original deal would have compromised ORE's interests. Nevertheless it was of concern to some who misinterpreted it as more of an opaque offtake arrangement with TTC as buyer rather than TTC as agent. The new structure should give shareholders more comfort.

As for the commission rate that TTC take, that was the subject of some questions during the Q&A part of the 2018 half year results webcast - still available on their website (there is a transcript on Seeking Alpha - Aussie accents seem to give them problems so I offer my own transcript below...)
Rahul Anand
.... The second question was just related to the TTC deal, now, sales agency rights going for the entirety of Phase II to TTC. Just wanted to understand if you can provide any visibility around what the potential rates or marketing rates might be on the revenue streams for Phase II?
Richard Seville
I’m not going to provide complete transparency, but I can provide you with some qualitative transparency... Considerably less than your commentary - you put out a note about the time - so, in broad numbers you divide by 2, to what is a below market rate, but that’s not a precise figure. And the deal takes us out, in effect, for 10 years on stage II, so there will be a renegotiation at that point in time.
Rahul Anand
Understood. So just circling back to what I might have written then. I mean I was trying to marry it up, sort of in line with Phase I, with 5% so you would suggest that I’m not in the ballpark there?
Richard Seville
No.
Rahul Anand
Okay. Excellent.
Richard Seville
You are right to current use 5% in the first instance, because that’s the typical deal. If you look at the Mitsubishi concentrates arrangements with our friends that’s their level, but no, we’ve negotiated a much lower number both currently what we are paying and in the future. And what was probably just as important as them getting sales agency was us getting involved and having equal rights when it comes to the marketing and the commercial aspects. So very important for us to be at the table directing where our product goes...

Chris Cahill
Thank you. A couple of questions. Can you just comment on the TTC marketing fee - are there any changes there? And in relation to slide 4, with the sales price guidance... 14 odd in the second half, have you shed all legacy lower priced existing contracts in that number, or are there still some left?
Richard Seville
Well Chris, I think I pretty much covered the marketing fees or the sales agency fees for Rahul there. They are considerably less than what one would consider in the market. And I was just thinking - I can do some numbers in my head as we talk - yes, and the stage II would be less than we are currently paying - a little bit less - and significantly less than we’d be paying, in a couple of years' time... because the stage 1 arrangements, obviously to develop the markets, have a slightly higher rate at the beginning than as they drag out....



Later there was a question about pricing which got this answer - it may shed some light on the sales process which appears to be by direct negotiation rather than auctions or tenders

can you give us some idea of what you're looking at on a spot basis, from your point of view?
David Hall
Depends on a number of factors, obviously product specification, size of the customer, size of the order, strategic value and the whole basket of factors that add in to the mix. In terms of price range, right now, you are in the range of approximately $14,000 a ton up to about $18,500 a ton on a CIF basis, as a guide.