“…Not to be hypercritical, but I don't find anything in your exchange with Pavel that is relevant to LAC over the next 2 years...”

Spot on WB DT. It has indeed nothing to do with LAC, at least not short term. The initial spark of this debate was an article of Matt Bohlstein about a conversion of existing ICE fleet into EV and subsequent demand for certain elements, such as Lithium. The key point of this debate was, that it is very unlikely, that even 50% conversion rate will happen (till 2030), despite bold projection of the chief pathological liar who’s name cannot be mentioned here :-) . The reason for that is the terrible state of “the Grid” (low and high voltage alike), which is not able to supply electricity for 140 mill. EVs. We may agree, that the relevancy for LAC is, that the growth of Lithium demand may not be as steep as lot of people think. Short term impact? Zero. The demand should go up at least till 2025. My guess is, that EV penetration will stop around 25%. Either way, I am not leaving my Renault Espace anytime soon.

“…Pavel is a wolf in sheep's clothing for sure.  He claims to be long LAC but publicly bashes the company on 75% of his posts …”

Again spot on (Bill, I personally do not see the wolf as personal attack, but you are the boss here). I know I don’t have to explain/answer my motives here, but for the sake of the transparency, I will elaborate a bit on this one. Regarding LAC, I am at the moment 20% short and 80% long. Reason for the short (not exactly short, just money taken away from the table) position was my bet on not exactly peaceful outcome of the election process. So I was hoping to sell at $11 and buy back below $9, while other panicking due to riots on streets of Washington DC. Missed the low end and tomorrow the LAC quarterly call may be the end of this trade. I also sold few thousands $15 calls against my position, because it was my general believe, that LAC just cannot be so valuable at the moment. I was temporary wrong on this one, but the calls were not executed anyway (which was really pity it did not, holding few thousands truly short stocks at $15, John E would be jealous of that). I also, from time to time, use courtesy of my broker (and the advice of John E), buy 1000 shares in the morning  and sell them later or not.  Am a I day trader? Probably not. Frankly I don’t give damn, what my title may be. I have made qualified decision, that LAC is my ATM machine to support education of my kids and later (well not really that late) to pay partially for my retirement. Apart of my dislike of Elon Musk, I am not fanatical about EVs or Lithium batteries. I don’t care what people drive and for what reason. I have just invested lot of my time to analyze LAC and it may be good idea to use this knowledge to (hopefully) my favor. NYSE is a place where people sell high, buy low (well not always and not all my trades were great coups) and there is no field on the trade form asking about my motives. Maybe yours form is different.

I don’t think, I “bash” LAC, I am maybe critical at most. I am indeed disappointed from the production delays. But that is the life in mining.  I also think highly about Bill, Call, JDubski, John E and few others, because they are just “old enough” (sorry guys) to know a lot about processing Lithium and I have been debating with them on TOB since my first purchase of Western Lithium. Do they agree with my view? Very likely not and my 3.8 rating (of 6 votes) here confirms that. Do I care? Well just little bit :-).  Either way, this is not religion club (for that join TSLA), IMHO this debate just provides a source of information for  my decisions and in exchange I offer my (let’s call it analytical) hopefully unbiased view in this matter. That may not be entirely true regarding TOB, but as I have explained earlier, my battle there is (especially last 2 years) taken on slightly different ground.

“…I would stop wasting time responding to Pavel and focus on real LAC investors…”

Please feel free to do so. This only point of your comment can arguably be considered to be a faul. Not because of your underlying opinion that I belong under the Rule No. 2, item 1 and likely item 4 and 5 (sorry Bill, this cannot possibly be viewed as against the Rules). That is your right to think so. However you are implying, that “the others” should do the same (well based on my limited knowledge of English, it is my understanding that you implying that other should follow your advice) and that I see as as a "personall attack", well sort of.

Anyway, just my 2 cents to your note. I am one hour late to work. Gonna go. Cheers.