Bruce Duncan and his small team have schooled Aubrey Eveleigh and Zenyattas hugely expansive team on how to develop a hydrothermal graphite deposit from metallurgy through to end-user price validation.
Even a cursory review of the steps Bruce Duncan has taken to advance the Miller Project in comparison to Aubrey Eveleighs direction of Albany, shows Zenyatta following Canada Carbons lead on how to capture the attention of the entities that will ultimately secure the production from the respective deposits.
The leading expert on GDMS analysis of graphites, a guy responsible for doing most if not all of the work for ORNL under DOE, Karol Putyera, was commenting on the stellar qualities of Miller graphite long before Zenyatta could get any such expert to comment in any similar fashion until the recent comment by the Ballard fellow and even then, the description the Ballard guy gave was dripping in vagueness ……… a pattern that Canada Carbon and all the third party experts they have working on Miller graphite simply do not follow (they provide full disclosure of processes and data points that they are commenting on).
What a joke this Ballard expose' on heat degradation has been as touted by Zennanites. It matters naught what the presser stated about Albany graphite with respect to the levels of degradation at 1,000 degrees when Albany graphite will never be used in commercial applications where that is a necessity qualified by a percentage of preservation.
The levels that come into play where preservation is deemed high, allow for Albany graphite to be among a massive group of others, yet no better simply because the utility is not a factor of 1,000 degree preservation.
Bruce Duncan and his small team are about to deliver a resource and PEA in an extremely expedited timeframe relative to that which Aubrey Eveleigh and his bloated team could or did deliver. Not only that, Duncan and his team are going to deliver "unassailable" metrics within the Miller PEA ……….. again, a quality that Aubrey Eveleigh and his elephant sized team could not deliver. The Albany pricing table is about as assailable as any company could deliver.
The "acid" issue for Albany was assailable from the day it was assailed so many years ago yet not one Zennanite can bring themselves to bury the topic by simply stating that indeed, the idea that "no acid" is part of the Albany process is something that Zenyatta and Aubrey Eveleigh in particular conveyed as a message time and time again and now with the PEA out ………….. in fact that message has been completely contradicted by the Albany process reality presented by RPA today.
Bruce Duncan has demonstrated that clear and concise reporting of process description, process data and even information deemed material by the company but frowned upon by regulators (even after pre-filing and given approval) such as indicative pricing by an end-user is ultimately the best policy to operate under if investor interest and fiduciary duty to those investors is the benchmark for a reporting company.
Zennanites can call Duncan names, they can call into question a resource, they can mock regulator necessitated clarifications of pre-filed releases but what they can't do is suggest Mr. Duncan and his streamlined team hasn't outperformed Aubrey Eveleigh and his entire team when it comes to performance and deliverables through company direction of a graphite project, especially on the basis of graphite metallurgy and end-user penetration to the level of securing graphite specific indicative pricing.
Ballard did not and does not provide indicative pricing for Albany graphite whatsoever and on that basis alone the Ballard presser is not a validation of anything that supports an economic end assumed in the PEA.
One only has to look at how Zennanites leaped to powder metallurgy pricing based on statements by Zenyatta in a presser on said market segment when in fact the PEA would come out and provide a number much lower than that which was perceived by Zennanites (based on said presser) prior to the PEA filing.
Hands down, CCB wins in every category of graphite project advancement from an ultra high purity end-user acceptance perspective …………… and once the 43-101 report comes out, this will include the category of resource, relative to all other metrics required to demonstrate an extremely robust value proposition.
Indicative pricing is already in the bag for Miller graphite while the Albany graphite pricing table is being choked out with every day that passes and the market begins to "price in" how looooooose those numbers truly are. |
