No, he’s pointing them out because after making them objectives, we’ve gotten radio silence on them since then. We all know the situation can change, but if it does change, shouldn’t you notify us of the change? Especially since you stated you had it as an objective. If they are no longer going to sell ore to Enami, then state so. Don’t just leave it opened. Don’t just leave use guessing why. If you are no longer going to be extending the tunnel or beginning an exploitation plan, then state so. etc. etc.
That’s the point in referencing AUMC’s past statements. If they have made these statements in the past as objectives, yet failed to give us any follow up on them, why should we believe AUMC’s current objective of having the plant up and running by Q3 2025?
Because, IMO, their credibility does not exist, they need to be more transparent as it relates to what’s happening not only on the mountain, but with this new financing arrangement/contract for services. IMO, because of their past behavior, I can’t believe anything they state, until they provide specific, detailed, facts. Not objectives, but facts. Currently, IMO, we only have generalities, not specific, detailed, facts.