Ann: Change in Substantial Holding, page-27

Yes those are on the ground specifics.

But I'm more concerned about why people get triggered by isolated characteristics (eg. small sized deposit...BUT the issue is mineralisation %, recovery rates in metallurgical results, ease of access with surface or close to surface mining, cheap mining methods, cheap mill costs because of the concentration of minerals, ready infrastructure...ETC!)

So One of these characteristics is viewed in isolation (small mill), or discontinuity of deposit (who cares? this is a highly concentrated close to surface deposit)...

and then people conclude: Oh small/modest mine!

That's not what matters! What matters is the revenue vs costs (capex/opex)! Surely!

Then you get people banging on about the delay before we get into production. Seriously?!
This is fast tracked into production, particularly the DFS being one year whereas in Australia the standard is 3 at least because of the pathological degree of detail required by the banks.

Why are the Germans awake to this company? Tell me that!

The market will wake up to this. A few people are indeed awake but IMO they're pretending not to be.
Why should they let you get cheap shares when they want them? One has bragged of having a six figures holding yet is nearly always negative, rarely positive.

I get weary of this pretend shtick to not understand, and the careful investors' shtick of I understand but it's a modest mine (when the reality is it's about preconceptions. The "understanding" is only partial).

Let's get serious. Let's ask ourselves what are they thinking by the German financiers taking out nearly 20% in this company.

Truly!