 Thanks Tracey, and Tracey is forever asking me questions that I can never answer. But be that as it may, I asked Tracey a question last week and I said, I'm coming along to this thing, what do you want me to talk about? And she said, well, why don't you talk about mergers and acquisitions? So to some extent I'm going to avoid mergers and acquisitions. So I think there's a much bigger play in the industry, and the industry has to really pull itself into line to become a lot more competitive than it currently is. And I'd like to applaud what Namaskar is doing, and also NeoMetals, because I think they're trending towards the right business model. And what I'm going to tell you about today is the way I think the industry can improve itself, and I'm going to talk specifically about hard rock. I will draw some comparisons with the brine producers, because you've got to have a benchmark, and at the moment the brine producers are, of course, the lowest cost producers. So who can deliver on their promises? That's a 2014 rundown on global production. The purple is green bushes in Western Australia, so that's China. About half of the red, which is South America, is China. The yellow is China. So if you split that into types of ore, effectively half of it is hard rock, and half of it is brine production. But the hard rock is accelerating, there's no doubt about that. So what are the issues that the brine producers have? It's not all beer and skittles out there, it's hard work. Long commissioning times, high capital costs, climate dependent course, you've got large volumes of solution to manage, and they're evaporated by using the sun. So the Atacama Desert is a really good place because it doesn't rain very often, one in a hundred year flood last year. Variable solution chemistry, you don't want too much magnesium in the solution, it's too difficult and expensive to remove. The aquifers are somewhat unpredictable that they pump from, and a couple of years ago I was talking to the Rockwood guys who are the only people in the business that have done the full 360 degrees, have done hard rock, were put out of business in 1983 by the Chileans, went to Chile, bought a license, started producing, and then paid $1.2 billion to buy half of Taliesin, the green bushes operation, a set of these guys, you know, why are you putting your money in hard rock, and they said, well, the brines are unsustainable, at that stage I fell off my chair, and I said, how the hell can you say that? And they said, oh well, recovering the brine is like sucking water out of a sponge with a drinking straw, and I thought that was a fabulous analogy. The sponge, of course, is the aquifer, the drinking straws, the drill hole, and your mouth's the processing plant, and not much gets to the processing plant. There have been failures with capital expansions, resource to reserve conversion is terrible, it's like the oil industry and those conversions are only about 10%, so ignore the very large resource figures you see on some of these things, and they rely very heavily on by-product credits. Now, that may be an advantage or a disadvantage, but in a falling potash market at the moment, it's quite clearly a disadvantage. Hard rock producers, no beer and skittles there either, high operating costs in comparison to the brines, and that's a consequence of using traditional methods for processing constrained by downstream converters, they're all sitting in China and they tend to be a bottleneck one way or another, whether it be by way of capacity or the types of materials they can process, and most of the production doesn't have a nexus with the end user. So what drives the historic costs in hard rock and equation to a large extent, and I won't go into that in a great amount of detail, but the standard processing technology is roasting, throwing dollar bills into a furnace, and then leaching, and to do that you need a high grade, so spodgermen is generally what you shoot for. Because you've got these high grade cut-offs, you've got a high operating cost, your reserves tend to be smaller than they might otherwise would be because you've got to alienate some of the material, if not the spodgermen itself, other minerals that contain lithium, and that relegates materials unnecessarily to waste dumps and tailings dams, but regardless of that, the smart money is moving into hard rock. Now, why is that so? People are obviously looking at rising prices where the sensitivities that I've previously mentioned don't matter as much. So looking at breakthroughs in technology that may change the energy balance, realisation that you may be able to with those technologies process lower grades, and awaiting processes that can also produce from fine-grained materials. But what we need is a paradigm shift in the operating cost profile. So the opportunity is really finding the solution to that, driven by the battery market, of course, which starts with minerals. And this is where we are today, constipated supply chain, most accessible lithium-z expensive stuff, the spodgermen, there's plenty of it lying around, but it does cost a bit to produce it. Downstream processing plants are antiquated, as I've mentioned, and to some extent we've got a lot of potential spodgermen producers coming on stream that really don't have the answers. They're looking at launching into what is taking the global umbrella, the high-cost end of lithium chemical chain. So the solution is improved efficiencies. There's no doubt about that, and applying that to the resources that we have available, looking at technologies that will take the waste and turn it into water, if you like, and have flexible processes that will handle a range of physical properties in the concentrates, different chemical characteristics, and a wide range of mineralogy. Not surprisingly, given lithium Australia owns the silage process, I believe that's probably the solution. So here's the cost curve. This is the one that everyone uses. It's a few years out of date, but we're waiting to save up the money and buy another roscale report so we can get an update. That's where the spodgermen producers sit, around the $4,000 mark. And I should just go back. The green blocks are the brine producers. So the brine producers have a median down around the $2,000 mark to go to lithium carbonate. Silage, that's what we reckon we can get it down to. And our process for de-risking this at the moment we're doing all the bench-scale completion work, we start piloting next month with Anstow, the Australian government, partially under government grants. We hope to commit to a demonstration plant by the end of the year and then go to commercial production. Why silage? Well, there it is. It has a lot of advantages, zero energy footprint, not all that sensitive to grade, a lot of by-product credits, and the capability to produce battery-grade chemicals. It's a hydromete process, so you're not pouring a lot of energy into the system. It's all done in solution. And it's very adaptable, handle all silicate minerals. There's a rough flow sheet, starts off with a sulfur-burning acid plant, add a few other reagents to it, custom design the lexiviant, dissolve the material, pH adjustment, temperature adjustment, pull out the by-products of the various bits and pieces. And we started this by looking at various minerals in sulfuric acid and wondered why the leach curves were different. We found out the fundamental reasons behind that. And you notice there's in walnut, lithium mica dissolves pretty easily in sulfuric acid. Spodgermen will be waiting for a couple of centuries for that to happen. But if you provide the right conditions to all of these things, you can lift everything to the same leach curve. So that's what it's all about. It's a zero-energy process that effectively designs the lexiviant to the mineral and pulls it out with residence times in general, around about four hours pulling out 90% or thereabouts of, well, any metal you want to pull out of it, quite frankly. And at the moment, we're doing something really radical. We're applying some of this to refractory gold, not to pull the gold out to get rid of the waste. So the corporate solution, I think, is looking at technology and matching the technology to the types of deposits. Fairly important, I think, to vertically integrate. And that's the sort of thing that Masquer has done and done very well. And certainly, neometals are following suit there. And that bypass is one of the bottlenecks being the converters. Allows you to build the relationship with the customer and get your financing by way of off-take agreements. Effectively, get the financial insurance to build your operation. So corporate structures need to be based on delivering a product at low cost and comparable with the brine producers, of course. Integrate the supply chain, which is the sort of thing that the Masquer have done, and use the off-take to your best possible advantage. And we think we have the tools to that. This is the company, that's its capital structure, and this is the usual puff out your chest in a corporate manner, and these are all the good things we've done. I will also pass a bit of credit to our partners in Mexico, Alex, who are in the audience today. We're not only working on spodgemene, we're not only working on lithium micers, we're also working with Alex on lithium clays in Mexico. So we're looking at the full spectrum. We believe we can provide a commercial solution for the industry to start to integrate, bypass the middlemen and grow straight from mine gate to battery supply. So that's where I think we need to go. It's all about matching the technology with the ore deposit. Thank you.