Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
time will tell, i certainly will be following the court case and ect.
I made something like 2-3 bags on my ibat position before i sold in may or so last year. since then I have gotten 2 other 3xbaggers so I am happy with my investing choices.
But are you serious in that you think ibat is a good company? I still follow the ibat story closely and I am still not impressed. They finally got the pilot plant built how many years late? 3 or was it 4 years late? How does ibat's competitors look? lilac and summit nanotech sure look like they have no problem getting funding, manufacturing pilot plants, and getting access to world class properties. Does ibat have access to any substantial lithium properties. Their maricunga concessions they have access to do not even look like they have brine under them, they are out side of the salar boarders on uneven terrain, while being in a protected national park and have never been explored for lithium brine.
I am surprised by the price movement in ibat, but will the stock price continue like this? especially when the court case against ibat starts hearings next month? I am still not interested in putting my money in ibat, maybe that will change, but Ibat is not worth it for me. But good luck to you, if that is your thing.
Where is the source about boric pausing tenders?
Why don't you post a link for the source? Also the video u mentioned.
Looks like USACH has property in Salar de Llamara
It does not look like a interesting salar at all, but then again i couldn't find any data related to the hydrology or the lithium concentrations. IBAT is a bottom feeder penny stock, very overvalued, with out a interesting pipeline or indications of good progress, I doubt they make anything of the RJR maricunga property.
Why do you think that the ibat pilot will be on maricunga. the article you linked to says "This research will materialize in the coming months in the salt flats of the USACH, so that it can thus fulfill its legal mandate to contribute to the development of the country through R+D+I." Also the property that sorcia has at maricunga through RJR is very-low-quality property, none of it looks flat or on the salar itself, while all of the property is within the protection zone of the national park.
Seems like ibat will be putting the pilot plant wherever the hell the USACH salt flat property is. Does USACH have property at maricunga?
Real news coming soon.
Amanda Hall featured on a podcast Jan 24th 2022 "Lithium Chile. So, yeah. And they've been our long-time partners. So they're down in both Chile and Argentina developing assets. And our technology is leaving Calgary in two weeks on a ship. And we're heading down there to start doing our first multi-client pilot"
"So essentially we started working with customers to bring our technology down to South America and set it up on their mine sites. But each of these customers wanted exclusivity. They wanted a piece of our IP or royalties. And so we basically said no to all that. We rented our own spot in a refining town. It's this little town called La Negra.
And we're setting up our pilot unit there, which is a 40 foot Sea container. It's enormous. And we're having six different customers, truck brine to us. So we can process it, write up reports, give them the products, we get then all sorts of data from six different salars. And we don't have to give up exclusivity or anything else. The only bad part was that we had to pay for it ourselves, so. But to me it was worth it because the security of not giving up our IP and not making a bad business decision about exclusivity when we're so young was worth the cost."
Committee of Ministers of Chile will evaluate the Project on Wednesday Feb 23rd.
This will be really great way to set up the next few weeks/months and the big moves that the company plans to make.
Given current situation ( lots of recent things to you can read about on hotcopper ) this is my idealistic idea of the best case scenario for the next month or two.
1. Late Feb - Early March: Successful evaluation of MSB's White Project by the Committee of Ministers..
2. ~ mid March: announcement of potential merger with Bearing lithium (also if Martin Borda wants to join the club maybe LPI will use equity to also buy the remaining private ownership of MSB to become sole owner).
3. ~Mid to late march: ECP contract announcements
4. ~Late march: final details about the demerger of Oz properties and potential merger with bearing lithium and ect.
This structural setup would maximize investment interest and in my opinion accelerate the path to final financial decision. If something like what I propose occurs it will set up for potential major financing updates occurring as early as April. I suggest that if a Mitsui deal is disclosed in April or May then it will potentially include details of installation of a DLE pilot plant and details about stage 2 development.
With the definitive feasibility study published here some near term things I think will be coming up:
Feb-Mar 2022 : info about pilot plant from mitsui tech partner.
March 2022: Info on demerger
~March 2022: definitive agreement with mitsui
By the end of march things should be heating up. I expect the plan going forward with finance will be much clearer by around end of march.
Also I speculate that LPI maybe planning to consolidate/merge with bearing lithium. I think that maybe one reason for the demerger of the Australian assets.
GLTA. holding long
lithium chile announce chengxin as a strategic investor!
upcoming updates should include
1. test results from the pump test in Argentina
2. information about summit nanotech pilot plant shipping to one of the companies properties.
3. test results for the gold properties in chile
the stock price and volume is primed for gains. GLTA holding long.
Demerger planned for LPI hard rock assets in Western Australia.
link
This is very exciting and makes me think LPI is getting set up for getting bought out.
Seems like US OTC holders of the LTHHF ticker should get the same options and treatment as the ASX LPI holders do. Anyone here have an perspective or thoughts on LTHHF ticker getting their fair share of the spinoff.
Chile's Codelco is planning to start lithium exploration in the next couple months. This will last until about q1 2023 and this news comes at a great time showing progress with our MOU with Codelco on the Maricunga new code properties.
link
lots of positive news to come soon . the lithium tender awards coming this friday. their results should have no direct impact on LPI operations but the general news of it could boost awareness of LPI
Also expecting updated DFS on the old code properties to be published anytime starting next week until the end of the month.
Finally i am looking forward to update about DLE and offtake agreement with mitsui. Along with greenbush project drilling about to start.
Cheers to the longs. things are looking better than ever.looking at a short term 3 to 4 bagger. long term 10 bagger.
The delay of DFS release until next month and the Chile presidential election causing some weak hands to sell.
Many near term catalysts are set to cause major upside in sp. 1. DFS next month. 2. Updates from drilling in Australia. 3. Ministry of Chile to award CEOL by January 14th. 4. Definitive funding and offtake.
DFS goes from 'early November' to 'December 2021', which is when the DFS is scheduled to be released.
Looking forward i think we see
1. December we see publication of the DFS.
2. Right around the time of DFS publication or by years end I think we see a non binding MOU or something with either a financial partner, bank, or additional off-taker. To help finance the phase 1.
3. Q1 2022 is planned for the binding MOU with Mitsui. I suspect we get binding MOU with one additional partner along with finalization of financing.
4. by EOY or as late as around the time of binding mitsui MOU we see info related to starting the process to update the DFS for phase 2 using DLE technology from the Mitsui subsidiary. This likely includes a DLE pilot plant.
5. by EOY or as late as Q1 2022 I suspect we get a update related to Codelco and the new code tenements.
6. Q1 2022 update on Greenbushes project drilling results and lithium resource data.
60 days of drilling should be about done for the production well in Argentina because they started the drilling Aug 23rd. following this is the planned 30 day pumping test. Lithium concentration and resource results should be reported for both the drilling and the pumping operations.
Looking forward I think we will see
1. A news release soon about the completion of the production well in Argentina in addition to a update
2. A news release soon about about the location of the DLE pilot plant planned to be installed by year end which is from Summitnanotech (either on a Argentina or Chile property). I am guessing they might choose to put the DLE on the new Argentina property and hook it up to the new production well.
3. An update about the status of the drilling operations at the Chile properties.
4. Also on the radar from the last news release, Lithium Chile Uniquely Well Positioned to Take Advantage of New Chilean Lithium Tender Process. It seems like they are getting approached by corporations about possible JV's due to the massive portfolio of high quality lithium properties in Chile. With the Chile government due to start a auction for new Lithium Quota tenders. I think because the corporations who are bidding for these tenders will want to have a property lined up there is a good chance we will end up in a JV with a large corporation with a MOU by years end or early 2022.
60 days of pumping should be about done for the production well in argent
Bearing Lithium a canadian company BLILF has 17.6% ownership over the Maricunga project which is the same project that Lithium Power International has 51% ownership over. I am invested both places.
lithium power international will be next imo. I dunno if there will be a buy out because the project is split between 3 corporations LPI own 51% so a buyout is possible I guess.
yeet!
Interestingly on schwab for ticker NTTHF it shows no trades today, i guess due to it being a holiday for the canadian market. But on yahoo for ticker NTTHF it shows loads of trades. so seems kinda like schwab is being weird.
Ann: LKE Bonus Issue to Shareholders
anyone know if the bonus Issue of shareholders applies to llkkf stock holders or is it only LKE stockholders on the ASX
June 9th News is out on SEDAR saying the Argentina project production well is getting planned for drilling in july. I am speculating that the company will use this new property to host the Direct Lithium Extraction pilot plant.
Excited for the Direct Lithium Extraction plant to come online by end of year. Got to love the fact that Lithium Chile is the fourth largest holder of lithium land in Chile.
https://lithiumchile.ca/news/lithium-chile-and-summit-nanotech-announce-signing-of-definitive-agreement-for-their-joint-pilot-project-in-chile/
Summit nanotech is really promising. The pilot Plant they are building for Lithium Chile is going to be like ~40ft tall and If my understanding is correct the products will be precipitated high purity lithium products ready for market.
how about that huge news?
https://themarketherald.com.au/lithium-power-international-asxlpi-lines-up-strategic-alliance-for-maricunga-2021-05-11/
Huge strategic partner with direct lithium extraction tech and upcoming offtake agreements, with full funding for Phase one and potentially future phases. Things look amazing right now.
i am here
I am here
Well good luck to all you lucky stock holders Lols. I am LONG GONE and won't be back to this one. There are plenty of other direct lithium extraction plays out there with better prospects than ibat given this FUD as you call it. I'll leave you all with this short list of higher quality (IMO) direct lithium extraction plays: LTHHF, LTMCF, and LLKKF. This will be my last post here.
Oh and also a new graphene battery is being developed which only uses graphene and aluminum in it's battery. Check out GMGMF it just hit the OTC yesterday.
Funny how Burba in the PR fluff never mentioned that the lawsuit's claims against IBAT on patent, intellectual property, or subsequent license agreements. Additionally Burba only mentions that the "IBAT's patent portfolio is not in jeopardy as has been falsely reported on the Internet".
hahaha Burba just says "oh nothing to see here, also dont listen to the internet they are wrong" lols.
With no support for this claim, and not mentioning the specific issues brought up in the lawsuit, or any sort of source or third party analysis or anything to support this. What a waste of a PR, seems pretty desperate and more so something you would see from run of the mill confidence man (Con man) talking points.
GMGMF is trading on the the otc as Graphene Manufacturing Group Ltd
The NAL Subco deal never happened..
What they want is what is what IBAT is contractually obligated to give them, plus damages for what IBAT has failed to deliver as per the contracts. So yes they want the shares of IBAT and yes they want all non oil-field related up and licenses..
Imo it's not about them wanting to get things they are not entitled to have.
That agreement you linked to never occurred. It was a letter of intent and discussions were still taking place. Following that letter of intent you described on oct 2017 IBAT signed a Definitive Share Exchange Agreement on march 2018 which I linked to in my last post but here it is again.
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/international-battery-metals-inc-enters-into-definitive-share-exchange-agreement-to-acquire-intellectual-property-related-to-oil-field-brine-lithium-extraction-675813953.html
No IBAT acquired NAL's intellectual property only as it relates to oil-field brines.
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/international-battery-metals-inc-enters-into-definitive-share-exchange-agreement-to-acquire-intellectual-property-related-to-oil-field-brine-lithium-extraction-675813953.html
They were explicitly allowed to make deals for their intellectual property for use out side of oil-field brines. Seems like they did nothing wrong and were wrongfully fired.. Seems like burba screwed them over.
Privitera may still be a employee. Here is a quote from the IBAT April monthly update.
I think you may be right, for some reason I thought Marc Privitera was still employed by IBAT I could very well be mistaken on this. I will have to look tomorrow and get back to you.
Lawsuit analysis made on May 19th:
This lawsuit, like all, is a moving target. First off so far we only get to see the plaintiffs views and opinions of the current state of things. We have not yet gotten a response from IBAT relating to these claims.
So in 2016 Burba partnered with these two other people to form a company called North American Lithium (NAL). These two people were/are Marc Philip Privitera and Christina Metz Borgese. These two people partnered with Burba to create a company called NAL, this company was to hold the Intellectual Property equally owned equally by Burba, Priviteral, and Borgese. NAL still owns the intellectual property for the mobile extraction unit. Well when this happened burba then formed ibat to focus on the oil-well brine. Specifically NAL contractually assigned the commonly owned intellectual property to IBAT which restricts Ibats use of the intellectual property only be used with oil-field brine. All other applications except for a specifically designated area of the imperial valley were to be used only by NAL. So the contract with NAL was that all three members would be also be part of IBAT where they could control the people who were 51% of the IBAT board of directors, and that ibat could only own the rights to oil-fields related intellectual property. At the same time the Salton sea brine areas in the imperial valley was set apart from that requirement but the company that owns the rights to mine the Salton sea valley for lithium refused to work with Burba. For some unknown reason, the salton sea company who owned the mining rights for imperial valley refused to work with burba either through ibat or NAL. So the two other partners of nal decided to try and set up a deal with the Salton sea company without burba, which was explicitly designated as something allowed in the contract that ibat had with NAL along with the employment contracts which Privitera and Borgese had with IBAT. Well something happened and burba decided to terminate the employment of both Privertera and Borgese, from their executive ibat positions, in may 2018 only weeks after signing the contract IBAT made with NAL for the intellectual property related to oil-field brines. From the lawsuit it seems he terminated their employment because they were making the deal with the salton sea company whereby he was not directly involved because the salton sea company refused to deal with burba directly. So this is the history lesson that we learn from the the lawsuit.
Going further down this rabbit hole, the lawsuit claims that IBAT has not released the original share certificates which IBAT contractually is obligated to give to both Privertera and Borgese, whereby they have not yet be able to deposit these IBAT shares into any "main street" brokerage firm because the certificates they were given are copy's and not the original. The lawsuit goes on to claim that they have not yet been able to get the original share certificates related to the NAL intellectual property acquisition contract. Also since this has happened burba has licensed the patent pending intellectual property acquired from NAL to Sorcia for non oil-fields related intellectual property and use. (Futhermore, at the patent office where burbas patent is running in to trouble. One of the main points from the examiner is that the use of the patent for oil-field specific brines is not a patentable claimed because it is a obvious use of such technology as it stands in the art. This makes it seem like IBAT will not be able to get a oil-field specific patent under the current circumstances.)
It makes it seem like burba has been violating the intellectual property contract agreement it has with NAL. Along with the withholding of the original share certificates contractually obligated to both Privertera and Borgese from the NAL - IBAT intellectual property contract.
Furthermore the lawsuit defines the plaintiffs as being both Privertera and Borgese, while Privertera has since been hired back on to a executive position with IBAT after being fired from such position in 2018, Borgese has not been rehired.
Although there is a way for things to work them selves out in ibat's favor for sure. Like there is a chance ibat could end up with reinforced rights to it's intellectual property and that of all the non oil-fields brine applications/property as well. But I have no idea what the court might do. And these allegations are pretty intense and unexpected, so I do not lean towards thinking this will occur.
So to sum things up these are the summary of claims against IBAT as presented by both Privertera and Borgese where Privertera is still a executive officer employed at IBAT.
1. Breach of Borgese Employment Agreement against IBAT
Burba Fired Borgese for inappropriate reasons. The lawsuit Requests payment for salary, severance, and bonus. As specified by their employment contract.
2. Breach of Privitera Employment Agreement against IBAT
Burba Fired Privitera for inappropriate reasons. The lawsuit Requests payment for salary, severance, and bonus. As specified by their employment contract.
3. Breach of Share Exchange Agreement against IBAT
Non-payment of Quarterly Royalty Payments, in violation of
Section 2.4 and Schedule C
Failure to create of advisory board “to oversee the development
and implementation of lithium extraction and processing
technology” where two of three positions are to be appointed by
NAL
. Prevented NAL from overseeing the development and
implementation of the intellectual property,
Prevented NAL from nominating 51% of IBAT Board seats
Licensing of technology to other parties
4. Breach of Contract Share Exchange Agreement against IBAT
By the Holders of Shares Issued by SA Lithium, Borgese and Privitera
(“Borgese and Privitera”)
Failure to deliver original share certificates to Borgese and
Privitera for 1,566,667 and 1,566,666 shares respectively in
violation of SEA Section 2.2(a
Failure to issue Vend-In Shares to Borgese and Privitera of
5,024,330 and 5,024,332 shares respectively in violation of SEA
Section 2.2(b) (i-iii) and Schedule A
Failure to issue Stock Option Plan shares in violation of SEA
Section 2.2., estimated to be 5,698,500 to each Borgese and
Privitera,
Failure to grant additional stock option participation in violation of
SEA Section 3.2(a),
Preventing Borgese and Privitera the right to nominate individuals
to fill the “EVP Engineering and Operations and EVP Research
and Development positions” in violation of SEA Section 3.4
Failure to grant additional stock option participation in violation of
SEA Section 3.2(a)
5. Tortious Interference with Prospective Business Relations against Burba and IBAT
by Borgese and Privitera
IBAT also knew or reasonably should have known of Borgese and
Privitera’s ongoing and prospective business relations with SSI because the intellectual
property acquired by IBAT was limited to “lithium extraction from oil-field brines”, and
EEA Section 7 excluded work done on geothermal sources in the Imperial Valley from
competitive conduct.,
Burba and IBAT’s interference with the above matters was intentional,
improper and without authorization
6. Breach of Contract against Burba
By NAL
Since August 2018 Burba has failed to provide capital to support the
operations of NAL
NAL sent Burba a request for a capital contribution for his share of the
NAL expenses
As a direct and proximate result of Burba’s violations of the contractual
obligations to NAL, NAL has suffered and will continue to suffer monetary damages
Overall I feel like there are many very troubling parts to this lawsuit.
First Privitera who is still a board member is part of this lawsuit against IBAT.
Second Ibat is accused of not fallowing through with the contract to acquire its intellectual property from NAL on multiple fronts and sections.
Third IBAT has known its intellectual property is restricted to oil-field brines but has made license agreements with Sorcia which are not related to oil-field brines.
Therefore this lawsuit as it is now presented is a threat to three aspects for IBAT.
1. it is a monetary threat due to the potential for inappropriate employment termination, and all the costs/fees assocated.
2 it is a threat to intellectual property related to the apparent violation of the contract between IBAT and NAL for intellectual property
3 it is a threat to the license agreements between IBAT and Sorcia because IBAT has licensed its technology for use in non oil-field brine areas which goes explicitly beyond the contractual obligations made between IBAT and NAL.