Pretty interesting and yet inevitable in my opinion. The amounts they are talking about are small and the dates (early 2016) are unlikely to be hit, although mining development times are much faster in many Eastern Bloc countries and the development times will be shortened if they are existing mines or recovering waste and tailings.
If anyone wants to rush and produce a tiny tickle of scandium they are welcome to, but I haven't seen any source that compares with SCY for where they are in the development cycle. SCY has volume, grade, and the metallurgy and margin necessary to scale into a producer of hundreds of low cost tonnes.
One of the comments from that article caught my eye: "Tracy Weslosky on March 17, 2015 at 10:55 AM said:
I looked for it but didn't see it posted. This is what SCY shareholders should see and I'd really like to hear what Mr Putnam has to say about these patents.
I am also about 100 pages into NIO's report and getting into the scandium stuff. I'll report back when I am done but so far it appears that my initial impressions were off. The deposit and geology is very different from SCY's which may mean their patents do not apply, or would be more difficult to argue that they do or should. I am still not 100% clear on this and a lot of it will have to do with how similar the extraction tech is between the two companies. After reading most of it though I already feel much more confident that NIO will not be a serious competitor to SCY because they don't actually have a scandium mine, they have a niobium and titanium mine with a little bit of semi-random scandium present.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
