In short: ESG.

This is why I believe Du's decision in Feb./Mar. will need to precede an announcement of a partner.

It would be educational to hear what the Agoracom community thinks about a partnership.

Who and why? What’s the relevant significance?

How much will LAC be willing to give up? 10, 15, 20%?

How might this decision of a partnership affect investors like us? 

I have my thoughts and wishful thinking but it would be very interesting to hear what others may think?

To Neil’s concerns - I would agree that downstream customers have growing concerns with ESG. Downstream customers might be one entity, battery production or even cathode Production Company. All sources of lithium have environmental issues. All existing sources of lithium whether South America or Australia have never been scrutinized as they are now with the ESG movement. TP checks all the boxes. Closing the loop helps LAC. Here’s a thought. Look into Redwood Material cathode production goals and location. Recycling will need to happen but will not be available in volumes to meet the scale of their cathode production. Check out Pumpkin Hallow copper mine. Smelters are local.  Will they sell to R.W. Materials for their copper foil? The timing is interesting and the global loop from mine to battery has a clear path to reduction. Nevada wants and needs this to happen.

I sometimes find myself caught up in the finer details (the weeds) and it’s important for me to keep in mind the larger bird’s eye view.

Will Tesla increase battery production in TRI Center for Megapacks. There’s a lot of exciting options. Jon Evans and team are brilliant!  Nevada needs and want mining!

Go LAC!