The NM interview was likely given on the condition that there be no questions asked about NOT's assessment of CLF's strategy in its ROF acquisitions. Since CLF now has a major toehold in the two ROF players prospecting major Cr deposits , it is doubtful that the interview can be taken seriously. Clearly, CLF has a lot more money for ROF investment long term, but wants to prevent another major from scooping total control. Whether NOT is negotiating with CLF we do not know, but we do know some things:

1) CLF will have a lot more money available for ROF investment at a time NOT will need a lot more money to continue development. CLF will do what it needs to control the Cr ownership and development.

2) More Ni at this point will create more interest in NOT but will not necessarily attract a lot more money unless the resources are exceptional. Ni is not in limited supply, and a price move is needed to generate investment interest.

3) The existing NOT control group will see an opportunity for a significant and inexpensive dilution of NOT as the Cr and Ni resource increases.

4) While securing the toehold, CLF will not want to make major financial or development commitments to NOT or anyone else until it sees who else is there ,say for Ni to co-develop the expensive infrastructure.

So, it remains early days, but some major directions are being cast. NOT retains what is the most significant areas of prospective ground (incl. JV's) , but CLF will emerge a winner regardless. NOT will clearly resist CLF gaining a major toehold UNTIL the second player (Ni ) can be brought to the table and that does likely require something more than incremental Cr.

Unfortunately, the NM article makes no serious attempt to look at that bigger picture, and I would have to assume that was deliberate or requisite. Personally I think CLF emerges a winner regardless , and just hope current NOT shareholders get to share in the value of what we find.