Member Info for CiaranC

Bannor; "manipulated" suggests intelligence and planning. As others are saying, I put it down to;

Bad time of the year for DFS release.

Unimpressive DFS figures.

Bungled DFS release.

Radio silence from the company when they should be promoting the share price.

I suggest this is indicative of indifference, ineptness or incompetence.

It may well be the CEZ are in the driving seat but EMH are missing in action.

I agree that this project pretty much has to happen in some form but confidence is low.

Now maybe I am wrong and a slew of great news will come out in the next few months, I hope so. You would think that if EMH are looking for a cash raise they would be doing their utmost to boost the share price. If this is their utmost then it is unimpressive.

This reinforces the view that Geomet (KC/EMH and CEZ) do not know what they are doing and are incapable of getting this project to completion in an effective and efficient manner. A competent party needs to be brought on board. The only way I see that happening is a buyout. But with the project economics then would anyone be interested?

[Perhaps if KC drives the share price low enough. Sorry, to be negative but waited years for the DFS as the game changing moment and instead this.]

Let us pray they don't decide to go for a cash raise till the share price rises significantly. And to rise significantly it will need actual milestone events to build confidence.

Indeed ghin, seems like the "guaranteed" ten bagger is now the "mythical" ten bagger.

The 70p plus predictions by end of play on Friday were a joke.

Releasing the DFS at this time of the year was always going to be awkward.

Let us hope that we get some traction over the next few weeks. Otherwise we will be relying on a steady stream of positive announcements.

Let us hope that when Keith talks about advanced stages of negotiations for funding and offtakes he is telling the truth.

I remain optimistic for 2026.

Actually, thinking about it, Canada has some lithium companies which might provide an acceptable partner.

Lithium Americas is actually a Canadian company and could spin off a European company (Lithium Europe). Although they probably have enough on their plate at the moment with Thacker Pass.

However I think, as gsdsitgs says, Australian companies bring the greatest experience and scale as a partner or even buyer.

Gsditsg said; "Having the state as an equity partner on tHaving the state as an equity partner on the EMH level doesn't sound that bad because I don't see anyone else excited about it."

Another good point.

Seems to me they have to get a partner on board with the necessary expertise to get this project to production.

Last time I looked the top four integrated lithium production companies are SQM, Albemarle, Ganfeng, and Tianqi. Two Chinese, one USA and one Chilean company. I am not sure that the EU would be happy with any of these given the global political situation.

That brings us to Arcadium which was taken over by Rio Tinto a few months ago. A British/Australian conglomerate. Would they be an acceptable partner (or possibly buyer of EMH)? Babis may rant against the evil Australians but is there anybody in Europe that has the necessary expertise to make this happen?

Gsdsitgs; Interesting post. Not sure about the appetite for full nationalisation and whether that might change the EU mindset about funding or not?

You raised a question in my mind. What do you think might be the chances of Babis doing a Trump and demanding 5% of the company in exchange for state funding? Obviously the situations are different with CEZ but Babis does like to follow Trump.

Well done Fingers, I am optimistic for a great 2026, but don't think I will catch up with you.

Hallelujah!!!

Father Keithmass has delivered.

Merry Christmas to all.

It is speculation that, whoever the fees are for, wanted to be paid in shares rather than cash.

They may have requested shares, the alternative is they were offered shares because the company is low on cash.

But I agree that it is a good sign that they were happy to accept shares and possibly/maybe that further announcements are imminent.

HappyLiUK. Many of your posts are excellent and thank you for that. This one is just a rant.

Oh how wise were those who bought at 8 pence. How clever.

I bought years ago at 40 pence based on interviews with KC. How foolish was I?

After all this time the price was shifted by the news of the government grant. It will be shifted again when the DFS arrives. It will not be shifted by interviews with KC and wishful thinking.

And personally I don't use the filter because, as an investor, I want to hear from both sides of the argument. I don't want to just sit in an echo chamber.

Didn't KC admit in the Rock Stock interview that a cash raise was indeed a possibility?

Googoosh; you asked for the arguments to support lithium vs NA and a number of commentors have provided that. You still seem to believe that NA presents a short term threat to lithium investments. In which case why are you even on this board? I think it is pointless replying to you.

Blonde-Ad Agreed.

For all the insults and calling them a troll, but it looks like Skelly was right again and no DFS by the stated date of mid December (unless something happens maybe today).

It amazes me that in the Skelly vs KC contest Skelly keeps calling it right.

In theory, KC should have the advantage because he is the actual Chief Executive of the Company so one might presume that he actually knows what is going on (or not).

Of course we already know that in another interview KC changed that statement.

So we are left with a DFS to appear “sometime” in December. Did he actually state it would be December 2025?

Presumably KC will be in the office all Xmas working night and day on this.

It would be funny if I did not have so much money riding on this!

OK, let me make it easier for you and just print the important bit.

"Economies of scale are the most important factor in the price. So although NA uses cheaper components, Lithium has a 30 year head start thus it will take some time for NA to catch up."

Factories do not just appear out of thin air plus the supply chains needs to reorient and the battery controls will be different and also have to be scaled up. This will take years, it is not just like deciding to use a different battery brand in your torch.

And even while NA production is scaling up the battery market is growing.

So NA will take a significant share of the pie but it will take years and meanwhile the pie is growing bigger. Plenty of room for lithium.

Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjiqqafD_0w

I found this link quite good. Of course it is still only his opinion.

The density of sodium ion cathode powder is, on average, 45% less dense than an LFP cathode. Taking other factors into account this results in NA having an energy density that is around 15% less than an LFP. But lower packing also means the NA can move more freely which allows or a faster charge and discharge rate.

Gravitmetric energy density for high end LFP is 160 to 200 Wh/kg and NA is similar. However the volumetric energy density for NA is significantly worse (around 30% less).

Charging; NA is better at 5 min compared to 10 min for LFP. Plus NA can maintain fast charging speeds as sub zero temperatures.

NA has higher safety levels and lower thermal management requirements.

High performance LFP can have a lifespan of ~5,000 to 10,000 cycles.

NA is less but is expected to close the gap.

Cost; at at low production volumes NA material costs will be high but at scale the cost of materials for NA will go to almost zero. CATL had news hype around $10 Kw/hr but he does not believe this hype. But he presents an analyses that suggests that NA will not have “parity” status with LFP till 2039 reaching “advantage” status in 2047. This is based on “average” cell price but some manufacturers in some countries could hit that status sooner. He thinks CATL could possibly hit price parity by 2030. Economies of scale are the most important factor in the price. So although NA uses cheaper components, Lithium has a 30 year head start thus it will take some time for NA to catch up. However in a scenario where there are price shocks in the lithium production space then some NA batteries could reach parity earlier (perhaps by 2029). Even then it will take years to significantly displace lithium.

Still lithium will never be fully replaced. He thinks No. NA will take an ever increasing piece of an ever enlarging pie.

NA is great for grid storage because cost and cycle life are more important then volumetric energy density but won’t dominate that market till the mid 2030s because first they have to hit price parity, then they have to scale up, then they the market has to re-orientate around to NA.

NA is also a good choice for budget EVs where the customer is willing to sacrifice 30% of their range, possibly for the advantage of somewhat faster charging in sub-zero temperatures.

Solid state NA batteries could challenge for LFP for energy density but are at least 5 years away and probably 10 years away.

Suggestions to mix NA and LFP for benefits but he reckons it would add cost and complexity.

So in the short term (up to around 2035) the NA battery hype is unwarranted, but in the longer term the hype is warranted. Even then there will still be growing demand for lithium because it is fundamentally more energy dense and we will continue to see increasing demand in mass sensitive applications that need that spec (like the Tesla

FYI lithium stocks dropped globally today after CATL announced it is planning to reopen its Jianxaiwo mine in China. This is seen as increasing potential lithium supply and is used by the Chinese to influence the "spot price". This has also triggered profit-taking by some investors.

The Chinese can thus somewhat control the flow and market price.

They are doing the same with some other critical minerals (I think an article mentioned gallium). By stopping and starting supply they are able to disrupt investments in projects to supply from other places.

If they twiddle their thumbs long enough the lithium price will be on the way back down again.

Whether production begins before, or after, the coming lithium peak will be interesting to observe.

HappyLiUK Thanks for your helpful and informative posts.

Sorry if you are baffled. Those newly investing at sub 10p may be all rah rah!

Some of us invested many years ago at 50p or higher based on KC interviews are a bit more jaded.

Yes, on paper, greatest resource in the EU, partnership with Geomet, we all know that.

There are the usual risks, politics, financing, chemistry, management. Many of these have been addressed.

Personally I hung on but resolved not to buy any more till things changed.

As LuckyLaurie and others point out the landscape has shifted dramatically. There has been dramatic derisking.

As far as the EU is concerned it looks like EMH is their primary lithium option so they have to back it.

The main risk now is management.

I have been buying a lot of EMH over the last few weeks at around 20p. The upside on this investment are huge (potentially).

I think KC has also run out of time and options. I think he has deliver what he says this time or he may need to go. I think therefore he will deliver.

Yes, also it is coming into a quiet time of the year for markets. Will be interesting to see whether the DFS announcement creates a big splash or a slow burn.