Member Info for Greenmachine67

RIP Adoubleuk......spent many an evening reading his posts. Always gave as good as he got but was never abusive. Sad day ....

"No, he doesn't have to. If it turned out, we would have the most unique project in Europe. We should control both the extraction and processing of lithium and subsequent sales. That would be a masterpiece. That is why CEZ plays an important role there. This does not mean, however, that if mining was not for some reason - perhaps if it was not economically viable - that it would not be a gigafactory. It would only lose the specific advantage that no one else has."

So, as I said last week, this whole project is unique and the cost advantages very beneficial. As long as the mine is viable ( and from what we've seen so far why wouldn't it) then we're onto something big here. Vertical integration is the way to go....

Another interesting podcast that includes a mention of emh at the start.....

https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cDovL2ZlZWRzLnNvdW5kY2xvdWQuY29tL3VzZXJzL3NvdW5kY2xvdWQ6dXNlcnM6MTM5MDQ5NjQ1L3NvdW5kcy5yc3M/episode/dGFnOnNvdW5kY2xvdWQsMjAxMDp0cmFja3MvMTEyMjQ0Mzg4Nw?ep=14

As a cost comparison the current cost of spodumene is $1000+. For conversion to product they require approx 8 tonnes of concentrate to produce battery grade product. For this you have to add the capex/opex cost which for arguments' sake is going to be $4-5k. So that's approx 12-13k to produce. Now this is for a converter ie Chinese to produce. Take our opex/capex of approx $4k (or less) and you can see the benefit.

https://youtu.be/MaWAPtw5zeA
Sorry, forgot to post the link...

Not related directly to emh but it's an interesting discussion that points out where we are ATM and where we'll be by 2030.....reading between the lines we appear to be in an ideal position with regard to location, supply of product and the ability to make the batteries. I cannot think of any other company worldwide that is in this position with the exception of perhaps Tesla.

KC has mentioned in a recent interview that the shareholder agreement has a takeover figure that is irrespective of the mcap at the time. When the cez deal was announced the SP was in the mid teens ( not 100% on this) and we are only guessing how this figure could have been calculated. My guess is that it'll be related to Npv value attributed once production has commenced. Whether this would also take into account future production/reserves is anyone's guess but if KC has been smart then we should be sitting pretty....

That's all we're asking for....

Borocay, I'm fine with the risk profile and have no intention of selling ATM. We all know (or should know) that there is a certain amount of risk with projects like this. What I'm pointing out is that the goalposts that we all believed to be in place have been ever so slightly modified. I don't think that pointing this out to others is a bad thing.

B-A, total garbage. Nobody is deramping for financial gain. All of the topics that have been discussed over the last few weeks have been started due to press reports and direct quotes from relevant parties. Nothing has been made up to scare investors to sell. Join the dots and come to a conclusion, either positive or negative is all that anyone needs to do
Interestingly, the happy clapper who has been telling us for a long time how this was going to play out either by imminent offtakes, share price predictions or how many EV buses the New Delhi Bus Company was going to buy has not had any input to ANY of the important topics discussed here. Makes you wonder why eh! Lol

Ant, for me it's the realisation that timelines are not and have not been kept wrt recent emh interviews. This is almost entirely due to our partners now directing our path. This is not a criticism but the way things are. On aim and elsewhere everything is driven by news and timelines. I've switched off to this for now and will be keeping an eye out for our partners newsflow...
The much vaunted shareholder agreement will be critical in future and is (imo) our true path in moving forward or cashing out when the chips are cashed in by our partner.

Agreed Ghin, all we're asking for is to be kept in loop ..

The method is to add carbon dioxide to the process chamber during roasting. That's it.... this apparently reduces energy requirements for the production of cement. How this will be applicable to lithium processing is anybody's guess.

Are we talking about SMS (sorry I keep calling it SME) or have geomet employed a process engineer?

B-a, I'd be interested to hear his or her name. Can you supply the details?

Sid, the expression "too many cooks spoil the broth" comes to mind

Jeez Arnaud, don't go there ........ All I'll say on the matter is that if they make the roasting part of the process work then it may not be a geomet ISP owned part of the process. Nobody at this stage knows what is going on in the background and if I was KC at this moment in the don't think I'd be best pleased with someone trying to undermine what they're trying to do with the turnkey approach. It all seems very haphazard with the way news about this has come out. If it was an agreed collaboration between all interested parties then fair enough but the lack of newsflow from our side of the business is alarming at worst and amateurish at best.

Yup

Again, from the snippets of info we have from today's meeting it seems that the processing route has changed and is in the hands of the czechs. I'd like to hear from emh on this....otherwise it looks like it's all systems go.

Not long to wait now. Press conference scheduled from 8:00 am UK time. Hopefully we'll have something to smile about by lunchtime...