More or less in line with what I expected, we are taking the...

More or less in line with what I expected, we are taking the staged approach, and flying the flag of "self reliance" as the justification.

Pretty happy with my numbers they generally fall in line using the same assumptions, not that I agree with some of the assumptions being used, back to that later.

As a shareholder its exciting to consider US$50m unlocks the project and we are able to show this independently verified study in negotiations with Huayou.

I think Huayou don't want to see a back-ended cobalt production profile, they will want the whole of ore leach option pursued and maximum cobalt output from day 1.

Now that we have demonstrated self-reliance, the ball will be in their court and the clock is ticking.

2.94% copper head grade for 8 years, open pit, low strip, simple processing.

We don't need outside help with that and it generates significant cash to reduce our reliance on outside funding to unlock the cobalt down the track in stage 2.

So - give us a good deal on our cobalt potential today, or we will go it alone.

Back to assumptions being used.

I believe the payable terms will improve, a lot, as demonstrated in what I've heard about the deal Glencore did with GEM for hydroxide. The knock on effect will be higher payables for concentrate, without a doubt, I'm kind of frustrated at the numbers being used in the study.

On input commodity pricing - the purpose seems solely as a response to the DRC mining code.

Note that CLQ did a PFS using Nickel at $7.50/lb at a time when Nickel was closer to $4.50/lb.

So who's complaining about $37/lb when cobalt is $42/lb.


Not throwing shade on CLQ. I certainly would have bought it back in the day if I understood how critical Nickel Sulphate was, I'm just responding to that little snipe.

Relax Bomber, we are all friends of Robert Friedland anyway