I would be in favor of both of those options provided we get a fair "win win" true value for this incredibly unique and special project. Nobody should underestimate what we got here...this is a one-off, pioneering, bold and fresh look into the future - Superalloy's materials project - something completely in sync with 'lighter, cleaner, stronger', better, and mitigating the effects of global warming...their is virtually nobody who cannot get behind this 'mission statement 'save the world now before it's too late' we are poisoning our home at an alarming rate and we need to rid ourselves of coal, nuke powerplants, oil feeding electric generators etc etc. before it's too late...'we have a solution! no more cheap rhetoric...Mark Smith and his team are bold pioneers in my opinion for having the courage to go first into this new paradigm shift that will have a huge effect on business. (Microsoft comes to mind back in 1980).
Talking about bold pioneers - Bloom Energy, with its patented Bloom Boxes are transforming the landscapes. No more power poles and wires, no more electricity grids etc.
And guess what? they can't get enough scandium for their Bloom Boxes. Oh and there is really 'no substitute' for scandium.
Anyways to answer your original question; I would rather go it alone, but if the share dilution factor was going to be too painful - then I would be receptive to the two options you pointed out. Providing it is a good 'win win' for both parties.
Cheers Jim
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
