We definitely need clarification on this 7% market penetration in 2017, as Roskill figures state "High purity graphite accounted for around 60-70% of the 2.4Mt of total synthetic and natural graphite consumption in 2012" 7% of the lowest figure is over 100kt and that's in 2012 easily add 20% for 2017, so we need to know why the huge differential. With various gigafactories being set up to mass produce Li-Ion batteries and Tesla coming online by 2017 (which alone will be consuming 80–126 Kt of domestic "clean" tech natural graphite of the highest grade a year) 30,000 tons sounds ridiculously low.

The numbers don't add up and I hope the complete PEA report will explain them to everyones satisfaction.

Thanks for trying packfan

We must bear in mind this is a PEA and this report is really to determine if the project is suitable to go forward to PFS or not. As an average the industry reckons a PEA is +/- 50% accurate a PFS +/-30% and a FS +/-10-15%. Most people, Roth included, were surprised with the conservative nature of the PEA so if we factor in a +50% margin for error on top of their conservatism, the numbers will look very different.

Not much point reading their NR's until they have a Resource Estimate

That was ZEN's response to the question re. the 660k from another poster. Not sure they'll answer it in a more in depth way but it's worth asking.

It's also interesting to read the PEA updates and how it changes the economics of the mine.