Zentek Ltd V.ZEN

RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Bashing?

[zen2twenty]

BOOB, it is my belief that you are an idiot. Why do you want those questions answered? Will those answers help you make a decision to invest in ZEN?

BobGreenfield wrote: Zen2twenty, do you believe the sample specs in the Japan presentation had been shaped and coated at the time of the inclusion into that presentation?  The company had posted another spec sheet in another presentation, the numbers were different, were those end product specs in your belief, or were they straight from the SGS lab without shaping or coating?

Of note, nowhere in the Japan presentation does it say the specs provided were not representative as far as google translation shows. Do you believe that was an oversight? Should the extensive qualifier in subsequent pressers have been included there, in your belief?

Certainly no offtake was secured after the Japan expose as evidenced by no news of such. Is that a reflection of those specs not securing any interest, as is?

Did shaping and coating come into the mix as a result of a poor showing in Japan?

Wouldn't knowing the end purity after the 86% reduction in NAOH charge have given investors a clear understanding of the cause and effect of such a drastic NAOH charge reduction?

Wouldn't that single data point help explain the now 25-30% target market for LIB?

Data is key, it gives you key information long before a PEA is ever  released. No need to be blindsided with a result you weren't expecting when heading into a PEA release as certain key data along the way gives enough information to make best decisions.

zen2twenty wrote: First of all, neither of us have ever completed a pilot plant or a flow sheet for Hydrothermal graphite, so WE are far from being able to give educated guesses. But with that being said, IMO they are producing a high purity graphite and supplying samples, the samples on hand, to end users, labs, uni's, government...,not the last sample made. It would be stupid to just throw out the older high purity samples, dumb. Past PR have said "tweeking" the process is not uncommon, which would explain the slight difference. So you have no support for your theory.

the_Chief wrote: That is true, however, when you complete pilot plant testing you provide your target market, ie Li-on, Fuel Cell, and powder, with your most recent samples, which theoretically are your best samples. From that point on it is expected that all "batches" if using the same flow sheet, will produce the same results. So that supports the theory that they never baselined a flow sheet in 15 months of testing? If thats true, what really was "completed by the Pilot Plant?

zen2twenty wrote: I'll give it a shot. Many of these organizations were provided a small amount of purified graphite material produced at SGS Canada Inc. (‘SGS’) Lakefield site during the development of a process flow sheet for the Albany graphite deposit pursuant to a preliminary economic assessment (‘PEA’) which is currently being completed. So IMO, they are experimental because the organizations that received the small samples, didn't request their specific range of specifications. They were simply given what SGS had purified during the flow sheet development. Yet, However these samples are representative of the product that could be processed and provide a good initial assessment and guidance for the potential of Albany graphite for various applications. Also, the reason they may differ from batch to batch and from the final product is because the organizations may request their specs the next time. But really, why does it matter to you?

the_Chief wrote: I think the reason the board does attract people is you will not discuss, NR content, at all? Its like you have no interest in the content unless its something obvious? Have you seen any discussion here, at all? No you have not, yet you say you are interested in the stock?
Don't use Bob or I as an excuse not to discuss, you can easily ignore me and him, and carry on a discussion. 
So simple question, why are the content of the NRs not discussed here? If you know how to read them, which everyone insists through sarcasm they can, then why are they never discussed?

Has anyone even slightly mentioned why there would be a sample variance at this stage and why after "Pilot Plant Completion" that the samples are considered "experimental? 

Why would you send "experimental" samples with no consistency to end users for testing? 

I see NO discussion on these points? All I see is estimated buyouts before PEA on Agora, which is about the largest disconnect I have ever seen on a stock?

Its like people are afreaid to address the NR content... I have never seen this before, never. So thats why I am assuming no one is addressing the content, they must not be able to read an NR? Its a logical conclusion at this point?????

notanironman wrote: Chief go PUMP your CCB............... !! where is the 0.58 you predicted last Fall LOL

Darvis wrote: yes dennis, out of all the investors in Zen only you know how to read nr's. sad isn't it that none of us can read, only you can read, just you. crazy to think how il-literate we all are. please continue to keep us informed with your so increadible ability to read nr's. you know how to read, you are always right, you cannot understand how stupid we all are, you're the chief, you're the man, you're the intellegent one, you're the chosen one, what the hell would we do without you.

thank god you're here. please continue to expel large quantities of bull-shitttt to this board because we, as investors, cannot get enough of you. it's so refreshing day by day to come onto this board and read posts from an azzhole who doesn't own shares and tells us all how stupid we are. it gives you the highest credibility of all.