RE:Video, to RudyWell, maybe it wasn't what he said, but more what he didn't say.
This Benchmark exercise was a fine way to present the company and in my thinking there were possibilities to tell the story better (sorry Waldo, btw where's the Li-origen video on the NLC website? -looking for a better quality version-).
The team managed to produce Li2CO3 with two different methodologies, the first successful but a bit expensive, the second better quality(?) and cheaper. The progression would be a good sample of the team not being satisfied with a good result and working on a better solution.
Is this process of improvement continuing? Will NLC come up with a third method with yet a likely different BG-spec Li2CO3?
The problem that we, retail investors, have, is that we have no idea about the clients BG-chemicals specifications. It may still be possible that the more water consuming process will give the results that the client actually requires.
The lime story could be told with some more attention to the vast reduction in ecological cost (transport, also especially through the very fragile desert environment). Not "many lorries to 3Q salar", but only one or two to Fiambala, or would that part of the process happen in Recreo (even better, transport by rail).
Elon is impressed by low C-footprint for battery consumables, so why not score on this issue also with the many who think Elon's way?
So, a few missed opportunities, that's all.
I hope this clarifies my comment.
Have fun.
P.S.:
It was fully acceptable when Waldo stated at PDAC that he could/would not talk about the coming partnership with "whoever it is".
We're six months later now and, in my opinion, COVID-19 may no longer be used as an excuse for the delay of further information.
At PDAC time, the SP showed signs of breaking out (2x), as it did in March, June and July (2x).
Every time it gets knocked down again. Why?
Just before PDAC, in mid December, millions of shares were purchased at bottom rates (<47 cents).
It is my opinion that the shares, purchased in December, are used to keep current shareprice down and that, at a profit to the manipulators.
This SP activity may cause the "prospective partner" to have doubts about the agreement and wanting to renegotiate.
The team may not be inclined to do that, may get impatient with progress and go to #2 on BoA-ML list, or #3.
So, who's the manipulator? #1, #2, or #3?
I wonder how the NLC position of BoA-ML fluctuates :-(
Same question could be asked concerning the positions of the original institutional investors.
Even with Argentina in a tight spot (default, COVID-19 and a socialist government as well), with the supply chain getting into a tight spot too, all interested parties know the true value of our deposit. It's a game with high stakes.
Writing all of this down, I realize that I wouldn't change position with Waldo for anything, he's much tougher than I am.
I suppose that the waiting for new information will continue and in the meantime, just try to
have fun.