Glad we are on the same chain of thought, subs. Hopefully the...

Glad we are on the same chain of thought, subs. Hopefully the thread can benefit for it.

On the phone so can’t reply to multiple quotes.

Re funding: Well the only other obvious elephant is Gary hasn’t yet been able to secure funds on reasonable terms and 3 months buys him some time to do so. No matter which way you look at it i.e whether we dilute down to 40%, we will still require funding in the not so distant future. Maybe there is something in the works for Lochinvar, and maybe there isn’t. I really don’t know. It’s all speculation until we hear it from the horses mouth.

Re Ann differences: Yep, thought that would be the case. Thanks for seeking clarification.

Re terminology used by SML: With the LOM costs quoted in SML’s Ann, I tend to think it’s probably just a difference in terminology used between our two markets/industry. The cost quoted aligns reasonably close with U/G mining costs per tonne here in Australia so I’m actually pretty confident it’s just a terminology difference. The mining costs could ideally be a little lower to be honest, but again, there could be some differences as to what is included in the costs. They could be including some U/G development cost in there so can’t judge it too harshly until more definitive studies have been completely and more info is available.