Ann: Restructure of Lithium Offtake Agreements, page-202

2 new offtake agreements, I think shareholders would be happy with just 1 for now and within 2 weeks!

How likely is that going to happen if you are thinking realistically?

The main question though is - was the PFS detailed enough for a productive mine? The PFS is generally +- 30% accuracy. Tawana jumped the gun for bragging rights and ditched the DFS and this has turned out to be a detrimental mistake. Hydrology is one of the main investigations in a DFS, along with further detailed year-by-year mine optimisation plans to generate true production costs with increased accuracy, whilst allowing for volatility in product pricing. A DFS is typically +-20% accuracy, 10%+ difference can be a big deal if running close to margin and a softening of product markets already envisaged.

Pilbara and Altura both spent considerable $$ and time on in depth definitive studies and were late to the party but now we are starting to see why the DFS in a new mining project is so important. They will continue onwards and upwards whilst the Bald Hill Mine will always struggle during a tight Lithium market. As John pointed out they are being bailed out time after time with no solid direction, how can one invest life savings in a company that has placed itself in this situation? A very brave one indeed!