You really believe that geologists would use that kind of...

You really believe that geologists would use that kind of language in a report designed to be read by other geologists & industry insiders? I don’t. ‘The dirt under our feet’. Hnnnnn maybe but is there an accurate measure out there for all the untested ‘dirt under our feet’ to form a valid comparison an industry would rely on? I’d say there most probably isn’t.

Companies compare themselves to known competitors in their industry, just as all other things are measured. An automaker doesn’t compare their vehicle to a golf buggy ( still a motor vehicle ), for example.

Scandium is more likely to find a demand avenue in existing alloys, not from a somewhere over the rainbow battery that doesn’t exist yet. You’re right that it could potentially lead to sales down the track but the one thing that is certain? It consumes cash that AUZ doesn’t have an endless supply of.

If there isn’t at least the idea that their magnesium could be moved from the minus to the plus side on the books? That’s actually an even more worrisome thought.

Why would extracting other metals be any more costly than the scandium which only requires a ‘minor additional cost’? Correct in one way though- if they had enough of other minerals they would extract them, but they don’t, so they won’t.