I agree. Specifications don't have to be included in the PEA. The selling price does; which i think is the sticking point. I have yet to find an bulk sale agreement with the price of ultra high-purity, or just high-purity graphite clearly articulated. What type of evidence is required to validate the number? Roskills numbers might have been too vague; Dr. Chahar is not at "arms length" to Zenyatta, so regulatory bodies can't just say "OK, if you say so...". I'm guessing no end-user wants to publicly state they'll pay $XX,XXX for the graphite as it gives away their costs for end products (i.e. batteries, etc...). Maybe their names can be protected (i.e. Enduser1, Enduser2, Enduser3, etc)

All other PEAs for graphite explorers have not used the large selling numbers that ZEN is even contemplating. They are using flake prices of up to $4K at most, but moreso between the $1K-$2K amounts. Not very threatening to the high-purity graphite players...and not very enticing profit margins for financiers.

So how will ZEN nail down a huge price point for the PEA? I'm not sure. Someone needs to blink. ZEN should already have a strategy for this, as well as a number of good NRs ready to go. IMO, the PEA won't be the catalyst for the stock price, but the NRs that reveal the strategy to get the product to end-users will be.

Here's an interesting (also terrifying) tweet from Laura Syrett (Industrial Minierals Analyst) at the Graphite & Graphene 2014 conference in Berlin

https://twitter.com/LauraSyrett1/status/542284350461849600

"New #graphite production needs to come in at below market prices to let buyers feel they are getting a benefit from taking it #Graphite2014"