Thanks for digging that up. There are now a series of the news releases noting that the purity has been achieved "conclusively" with the simple caustic bake process. From the release above the 'trials' stated this, then the bench tests stated this then the lab tests stated this.Furthermore, AE has stated and it has been posted here that their are no issues with the process.

To state or imply there are issues is either a shot in the drak type guess (based on the less than stellar number of update releases) or it is saying that AE is outright lying.

We all know that any company, and especially small caps can have management play investors. But does anyone believe that in this case? Huge insider share holdings with no sales, no pump and dump, adding top end management talent, no I should say elite talanet in the industry, etc. etc. AE has never been caught in a lie or caught in a contradiction. Every 'red flag' to date has been dismissed as invalid.

I am trying not to wear rose colored glasses, and like Mongo I try and see what I could be missing. We have the purity, we have the sales price, we have tonnage. We have a cheap process to get the purity (may be more expensive to get ultra high purity).

Barring any further news releases this month, I think the AGM will be an excellent time for those who can attend to ask the right questions that can kill the 'process' questions some have raised. If this can be put to bed, what is left? I suppose the skeptics will find another issue to hang their hats on.

Every stock that has blue sky potential will always attract a cult following and it's share of skeptics. And there is simply never enough publicly released information to satisfy all skeptics - it is impossible, only those in the boardroom know all the variables in play. Sometimes the skeptics are right (Bre-X) but they are often quite wrong (Diamond Fields, Winspear, Aber). It is good to look at what could go wrong but it is also good to look at what is right!