Y4ukikmycow, I don't agree with your analysis that Vintage's...

Y4ukikmycow, I don't agree with your analysis that Vintage's "...statement has no merit in it whatsoever other than downramping..."

Maybe I'm being stupid here but here is my take on it from what Vintage posted (copied from above)

....The point is that SKI has choices. It does not necessarily 'need' what AUZ has. There are alternatives.
The key alternative is its current suppliers - Ecopro and L&F.
Both have been in the game for many years and both are well ahead of the curve in recognising current opportunities.....

Considering my understanding of the offtake agreement:

IF AUZ gets the product out of the ground THEN SKI will purchase the product to the tune of 100% of product for 7 years with the option of a further 6 years (as you said)

On the other hand, IF AUZ doesn't manage to get the product out of the ground THEN AUZ will have no product to sell and SKI will have no product to purchase.

Based on your reply above I understand that you're saying that if SKI want to purchase cobalt sulphate or nickel sulphate they are bound to source it exclusively from AUZ? That's not how I understand the offtake agreement, maybe you would be so good as to share with me where it is referenced in the offtake agreement that SKI have agreed to EXCLUSIVELY source cobalt sulphate or nickel sulphate from AUZ.

To develop the theory of SKI having agreed to EXCLUSIVELY source cobalt sulphate or nickel sulphate from AUZ this would be saying that SKI have been complete muppets by effectively tying themselves into an agreement of shooting themselves in the foot on the following counts:

They're not allowing themselves to source the product from elsewhere? They're not allowing themselves to purchase more product if the demand for it was there during the period of the offtake agreement? Lastly as the offtake agreement is agreed, them SKI are effectively bound to it so if AUZ doesn't get financing, it doesn't matter, as SKI will have to pay for the development of the mine?

Please don't tell me that you either believe that of that you're really going to try to sell me that?

All IMHO

NB If you don't like my take of the situation, please don't just throw it back at me that i'm obviously downramping (as per my recollection (though i may be mistaken) you've tried to tar me with that brush before, which riled me immensely). So just to be completely transparent, again:

I'm hopeful we do get the product out of the ground and everything tuns out rosy. Currently i'd be looking at making a loss of 43.87% if i sold my entire position in AUZ today, so naturally i've got crossed fingers that all turns out for the best. However unless you can show me the where in the offtake agreement there are binding guarantees that the mine will be financed through to production I'll remain in the crossed fingers state as i haven't yet seen binding financing agreements that will ensure complete build.