Lithium Drill Results From Quebec | Brunswick Exploration CEO Interview

Summary

• Market Outlook: The lithium market is experiencing a temporary imbalance between demand and supply, with demand outstripping supply due to the rapid growth in renewable energy and electric vehicles.
• Company Strategy: Brunswick Exploration is focusing on grassroots exploration during bearish market conditions to prepare for future demand, aiming to advance its Mirage project to a Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE) stage by the end of the year.
• Investment Opportunities: The company is leveraging its expertise in exploration to discover new lithium deposits in underexplored regions like Greenland, aiming to build a diverse portfolio of assets.
• Project Developments: At the Mirage project in Quebec, Brunswick has completed significant drilling, revealing multiple well-mineralized dikes, and is planning further exploration to expand its resource base.
• Technical Insights: Preliminary metallurgical tests indicate that the Mirage project is amenable to Dense Media Separation (DMS), which could result in lower operational and capital costs compared to flotation methods.
• Market Position: Despite the lithium bull run, Brunswick's stock has not yet participated, attributed to market cycles and recent financing activities, but the company maintains strong insider ownership and is poised for future growth.
• Risk Management: The company emphasizes careful capital management and strategic exploration to maximize shareholder value, avoiding overcommitment to any single project.
• Future Plans: Brunswick plans to continue its exploration efforts in Greenland and Quebec, with a focus on identifying large-scale, economically viable lithium deposits to attract major industry players.

Transcript

Today on the CEO barbecue, we're looking for lithium in Quebec as well as Greenland together with Brunswick Exploration. If you want a bullet point summary of this conversation and all the other CEO barbecues in your inbox once a week, go to resource.com and subscribe to our free newsletter. Now, the company you're about to hear from has paid us for the production of this video, which means that this is not research. It's an advertisement and you should treat it as such. Research is conducted by reading the company's official filings which you can find on setterplus.ca. And please only watch this if you absolutely know what you're doing. This interview is intended only for experienced junior mining speculators because mineral exploration development and mining is a very tough business where failure is the norm and should be the expectation. This is going to be a conversation that is general and impersonal in nature containing forwardlooking statements. I am not a licensed financial adviser and my business sells content producing services which also makes me biased in multiple ways. So before continuing on, please talk to an independent investment adviser with a good long-term track record because your capital might be at risk. If you're not 100% sure you understand 100% of the disclaimers I just showed you, please go to the last section of this video and do not consume this content unless you fully understand and agree with everything said therein. That said, Brunswick is listed as BRW on the TSX Ventures Exchange, where over the last 3 months, the average volume has been about 270,000 shares with a market cap of $34 million and just under 250 million shares outstanding. Today, this is a 13.5 cent stock with a 52- week high of 30 cents and a 52- week low of 11. 50-day moving average is at 13.1 here and the 200 day moving average is at 15 cents which means that the stock is now trading between the two of them. No uh fulllength introduction needed here for Brunswick though since Killian has been on the channel many times over the last year or so. So for for those of you who might still want to see some of those um early CEO barbecues, a playlist containing all of them will be linked in the description of this video. Time for me to shut up though and uh Killian let you do the talking. But first of all uh thank you for being here today. It's always a pleasure to be here. I very much enjoy our conversations. The pleasure is mine and I am looking forward to the conversation because um lithium prices seems seem to have woken up finally and I do want to talk about what's happening with with the lithium price and with the lithium market here in a minute. But but your stock price has not participated in this lithium bull run so far. So what's really going on? What's dragging you down? Look, I mean it it's going to be classic. We've been trading in sort of this range now. uh call it 10 to 15 cents for a few months. Uh we did complete a financing which there's no two ways around it had a life component uh included in there. So there's going to be an overhang on the stock. I mean I can come up with fancier reasons but I think it's as simple as that. I think there's just a bit of a cycle that we're seeing a little bit right now. I think the amount of results, the amount of work that we've been doing that we have done and continue to do over the coming months and quarters are it's just naturally going to resolve itself and then we can sort of enjoy that same run that some of the other stocks have uh also enjoyed. Yeah. Are you you were buying some stock last year around 19 cents um looking looking at it just about a year ago actually uh now. So it's it's been about a year since you bought in the open market. Why not come back to the market yourself with a price that's at what over a two-year low now? Yeah, look, I mean, it's it's in the plans. Obviously, it ends up being a situation where since we're always active, there's always something that uh prevents us from being in a position to buy a little bit of paper, which is the reality of everything else. But, you know, at the same time, we've had uh board members participates in our financing. You know, everyone's reloaded as much as they can. So, you know, overall, we're still a company that has the benefit of having a a fairly large, you know, insider ownership relative to a lot of peers out there. There's a couple of threads that I'd like to pull later on here from from what you just mentioned, you know, doing all that work. I know you're doing some field work right now, so we'll talk about everything. But just to the point of the lithium market itself or the prices, um given sort of the reason behind this this this spike in prices, do you think this is temporary and and lithium is headed back down here anytime soon? I mean, there there there's two main trends that we have to separate here. I I think when we take a step back and look at the lithium market, most participants will agree, I mean, if you have a view on it, that there's going to be a window when when things sort of place themselves back, we were faced over the last 3 years with uh a dramatic step difference between demand and supply. And that's normal. And I've said this before and I've said this with you as well of an immature market that is trying to mature. So you end up in a situation where demand far outstrips supply. What does supply do in those scenarios? Well, it tries to catch up. The mining industry is one where it's either everything's on or everything's off, right? There there's no half measure, especially when the prices go tfold because that strong demand. So we're living that flip side of the coin where supply has dramatically overshot demand. And people will tell me, "Oh, well, it needs supply discipline. We need to see minds shut down." And I I don't want to say that that's foolish of a comment. But to me, it feels a little bit. For one reason, a lot of the new minds came true single asset companies. All right? So, a lot of this incremental supply is single asset companies that if they shut down the mine, they instantly go bankrupt. So, of course, they can't really shut down. They have to produce as much as they can. If anything, they need to produce more to try to get their unit cost down. Now, you've seen some a few mine shutdowns over the last, you know, call it 24 months, but nowhere near enough. So, I I don't think supply discipline ever happens, which is going to be a knock a little bit later down here when I talk about my views, future views on the lithium market. But ultimately, what really matters is that demand stays strong. Okay? And so it's going to replace itself and I mean the Lithium market places itself into a interesting position for investors naturally through this demand growth. So if you have a view on the lithium market, I I like to to to keep it kind of simple. If you're very bullish, then maybe 2026 is a scenario where the market balances itself again. If you're very bearish, then maybe it's 2028. and reality is probably going to be somewhere in the middle because it always is, right? So, call it a 2027 type of scenario. That's that's my view where the market doesn't balance itself from supply cuts but balance itself simply from demand. All right? And we cannot underscore just how strong that demand looks like even right now. And there's one major reason why it's so strong and that remains renewable. Setting aside the whole talk about Trump trying to, you know, make sure that there's never another solar panel built in the US, as silly as that is, at the end of the day, you are faced with the a singular event. I mean, it's kind of crazy to see and we'll sort of look back 10 years from now. It's like, wow, I guess that happened really fast. where solar and wind are not just cheap power, they're staggeringly cheap power to generate and to install. All right, it is hard for us to understand the rate of solar installation that is happening. 2 years ago, you were installing or sorry, 3 years ago, you were installing a gigawatt of solar power every 2 days. One year ago you were installing a gigawatt of solar power every day. That number is now every 15 hours. Okay, we are installing so much solar power. And what does that mean? Well, it is an energy source that is transient where it peaks during the middle of the day and you want to bring it out to other portions of the day. This is it's very classic. I mean in Europe it's something that Germany faces all the time right that ability to store power is very very important. You want to bring that peak power generation to let's say the evening 5 6 7 8:00 p.m. Right? And so what do you want? You want energy storage and you want what are called 4 to 6 hour batteries. Well, wouldn't you know those are lithium batteries. And so it ends up that's why lithium demand is so strong because we're still building a lot of this storage capacity across that grid as we continue to see staggering amounts of investment on the lithium side and then or on on the solar side and then it just has knock-on effects right just in China uh the fastest growing market obviously it's the number one market for EVs but now as we keep making better and better uh lithium batteries we start to see new applications turned up that we didn't consider before. So, as much as Mr. Elon Musk talked about his Tesla trucks and they're still forthcoming in the US, well, China is now growing those leaping bound. I think last year there was 10,000 uh lithium heavy duty trucks built. They're now up to a 100,000 one year later. And that market's probably going to grow 10fold again over the next 24 months. and they require a lot of batteries. Obviously, they require a lot of lithium and so we're just we're still at a nent part of the this sort of cycle is still part of this industry. The lithium industry is still ongoing. So, yes, there's going to be pains. There's going to be ups and downs. Those are all perfectly normal things as much as they can be painful when it's on the downside. But the story hasn't changed. The markets are still very good for lithium and I see no reason for them to stop being particularly good because we're we're making electricity in the cheapest form possible available the world over. Places like South Africa used to be known for brown outs and blackouts, but they've installed so much solar panels and solar power that it's actually caused the grid to be stabilized. Right? And this is the world over. I was just talking to a gentleman who's now installing solar panels across all of Cuba. Cuba is known for blackouts, constant blackouts. That is a huge damper on their economy. Wouldn't you know, they're building so every single resort down there is building solar panels. Everyone's putting solar panels and they're all putting batteries with them. It's just this new demand that is hard for us to quantify. But we're seeing it in, you know, supporting this industry and continuously growing at a very aggressive pace, which is going to naturally balance the market and bring back price appreciation. Now, in terms of what's currently ongoing for the pricing environment right now, I'm I'm bullish on one side, but I will face a certain amount of hesitation in terms of fully dipping my toe into it, if you will. Um, China has been undergoing a lot of deflation, and I feel that China as a government is wants to be a little bit more comfortable with recreating an inflationary environment. That's why we're seeing a little bit of price movement on the copper side. Again, irrespective of Trump's talk with banning copper imports. You're China is still the number one buyer of copper. And so, if they're willing to see a larger copper price, it's because they want a little bit more of an inflationary environment for their home economy, which has been largely deflationary. Same thing on the lithium side. I think they're they want to have a little bit more inflation on the lithium side which has been at all-time floors. So they want that price to be reflected with the producers as well as the refiners and the manufacturers ultimately of lithium batteries. They want to have them a little bit improved margin so that they reinvest into the economy. So you know whe whether these things continue, whether the lithium price continues growing, I I think we're we've seen the floor. I mean, the question now is not about, you know, we're standing at 600, $6 or $700, let's say, on the spotcon side, and doom sers out there going like, it's going to go down to 400 and 300, which was where the alltime low was in the last cycle. No, set that aside. That's not the case anymore. The question is, you know, I think we're in a now in a we've seen the floor. Whether it takes a little bit longer for us to get back to 12,500 maybe. But at the same time, you know, I don't think it matters. I think the trend is in and whether the bullish or the balancing environment happens next year or 27 or 28th, ultimately it doesn't matter because it's going to happen and that's exactly what you want. That means that momentum is going to come back into this sector and companies that are involved in this sector are going to be benefiting from it and it dovetales into our strategy. You know, people would say, well, you've got Mirage. Like classically, any company once they have an asset like Mirage, especially in a bearish environment, would retract only to Mirage. And you know, just because that's what everyone else does, that's what we decided to not do in Brunswick to a certain extent. So, well, look, wait a minute. There's a lot of opportunities out there that people are ignoring because it's a bearish environment classically, right? I shouldn't be doing grassroot work. But the problem is that grassroot work takes a long time to do. So actually when it is bearish that's when you should be doing. So when the market does turn around you have something that's much more advanced that's much more exciting to the market right that you don't have to tell them hey you wait you're going to have to wait out like 3 4 years before this ever becomes anything of value right and then by the time you get it to a good spot oh you missed the cycle so now you have to wait for the next cycle. Oh my god that's that's how most companies work. And I I think that's a wrong way of doing business to be quite honest. It is that strategy for Brunswick specifically that I want to talk about. Um because you and we'll start talking about Quebec first. We can work our way up to Greenland eventually. But over on Mirage, you've kept drilling um and and you're discovering new dikes and and you've consolidated ownership. You've done some met work. Uh you now own 100% of that property. As I said, I do want to talk specifics about everything there, but is is more exploration here really the answer for Brunswick's strategy or is it time that you you you know, you finally moved this to an ME soon or because you discovered more and now it's too early like you kind you're kind of at this point where like I think the business strategy is also not entirely obvious here. So where do you take it from here? Do you do an MRE? Do you keep drilling? Yeah. So, so we will bring it to an MRE stage to be clear. um that that's part of our objectives. I mean we're we're aiming for the end of the year might be a little bit before might be a little bit after but that's sort of the internal target to a certain extent. We are driving towards that but at at the same time to me it it also becomes I don't want to say philosophical but it also becomes a question of capital management. This is something that people don't appreciate as well fully when they look at an asset. Drilling an asset is really the most expensive type of work you can do right. So in a bare market, it's the most dilutive work that you can possibly do for a company. On the flip side, doing work like we did in Greenland, uh like we're now starting to think about other areas as well, that is high impact work, right? Because I get to do I get to test a significant amount of targets and in a cost-effective fashion, right? A million dollars at Mirage allows me to test only Mirage. a million dollars in Greenland allows me to test 50 different targets, right? It's that leverage effect that you get from the other one. So, I mean, it's not to say that we're entirely abandoning Mirage or we're stopping. No, not at all. We we've drilled. We're putting on MRE. We still have I mean, this asset is going to be opened. there's still a lot more work that we can do and and we will do that work, but we're not we're not dependent solely on that asset to to justify the valuation of Brunswick, to justify what the company is doing. It's not like, well, all of our eggs are in this one basket. No, it's this is a big portion of the eggs in the basket, but we have other opportunities in front of us, and we have a team that can unlock those other opportunities as well. So it's extra benefit for our shareholders when the markets place themselves again you know and we start to see a strong lithium price stronger than what it is right now even uh then we have a portfolio that no other junior offers and when people come back and say okay well what can I do in this space and you have the classic sort of vultures in the saying well lithium's hot now I want to get exposure to it well we did all the work right we looked through all the targets and and filtered through all of them and made all the new discoveries before they had a chance to move in. That's the type of thing that I like to do in Brunswick. You did have final results from Mirage come in almost two months ago now and uh we we can talk about that as well, but it's good to note that you're still planning that MRE for this year. Um well, by the end of this year, so a little bit earlier, a little bit later is what you said there. What do you this program? Was it up to your internal expectations for you? What what did you essentially what did you think of this program? God, I I I I would like to meet a company that ever says no. Uh look, I'm going to be biased. Of course, I'm going to say yes. But no, no. To to be quite honest, it it matches it's more it's a continuation, right? We've we've identified a number of near surface wellmineralized uh dikes that vary anywhere from 80 m in width down to a few meters in width that are all in this well-contained 2x2 km area. We have a larger surface where other dikes exist that is all upside which is what we're trying to figure out you know how much work we want to spend there what type of work we want to do there which is I would say what you know 2026 is mostly going to be about um but we're quite happy with what we've done right now we're in the evaluation stage of understanding you know putting all of this data that we've 've done over the last few months when it comes to the work at Mirage and making sure that you know if we once we start the ME process we're quite comfortable with uh the number that's going to result out of this you know we want we want you know between at least god at least 45 million tons but realistically 50 million tons we want more than that so we want to be easily in that threshold we want to demonstrate that this is a large scale asset I mean we've only drilled 20,000 meters. So it's not like we put you know unimaginable amount of meters. When you look at everyone around us I mean be it Winome to the south I mean Patriots a different ball game. They're in the hundreds of thousands of meters but even Patriot sorry even Winston to the south they've already drilled you know almost I think it was their first resource they were you know 30,000 meters. So we we can do more but to your point is quend ends up being a question of what's the value in doing that right get it out there put the number demonstrate the work you've done uh get people comfortable with it and then you can keep growing it but it it puts it puts a milestone out there so people say well this should be worth at least XYZ right they have 40 45 50 55 million tons and this is the number that they should go ahead and run with and then if they keep growing from there, that's the base that they're growing from. Yeah. Yeah. Well, we can talk about these the the the specifics there and we've talked about what you hope to see from Mirage. We talked about it in in previous conversations said about 50 million tons. What about grade? What do you has your expectation for grade changed after this year's program? No, no, no, no. Gra grade has not changed. I mean, it's definitely going to be above 1%. I'm not even I mean, I'm not even worried. And and that's normal. Um, most lithium systems if you actually take a close look at them will always almost always I shouldn't say always but almost always grade above 1% and that's that's the nature of an economic deposit. You're dealing with a spamine mineralization spamine crystal itself contains approximately 8% plus or minus uh lithium naturally in it. you uh end up being in pegmatites that carry a spamine zone that will have a relatively consistent grade across them somewhere around that 1.5 mark plus or minus a couple of you know points of percentages and then you add in dilution. Well, there's a reason pretty much all the deposits have the same grade. That's just the reality of it. Well, on the other end of the grade equation, there's thickness as well. What's the true thickness of these newly discovered dikes? Or or how do you know if if they're even worth pursuing from an economic standpoint? Because you can see the grade u and you're getting like 30 meter hits and whatnot, but but how do you know they're worth pursuing from the perspective of true width? Oh, so so pretty much everything we've drilled up to now has been 85 plus% true width. There's pretty much nothing that we've gone down dip uh anywhere across the project. So, we're very confident in pretty much everything that we've demonstrated as being close to true thickness. I mean, to be quite honest, we won't be able to get anywhere near the tonnage we hope to get if if these this wasn't reality, right? And even in the the areas where um you know, you there's like areas where we've identified uh stack dikes, right? They're they're so tightly held together. Yeah. There's a bit of internal dilution that happens from the waist rock in between, but it's it's almost like a continuous horiz. So, you just scoop it all up and away it goes. Yeah. What do you think is a minimum thickness though needed for for actual mining in these type of systems? I mean, it's like anything, you're you're going to want at least a couple of meters, right? Below that and and we we don't really report anything below a few meters anyway. uh we definitely don't highlight them from our perspective. Uh even as we go towards an internal re or towards a resource at the end this year that thing's going to be reflected as well. I mean if if we have a call it a 10 centimeter dyke I'm not even worried that's not going to make the cut. I mean, we're very realistic. Again, we from the get-go look at all of these assets from the minability, right? What are the odds this is going to become a mine? And this applies to from the start at grassroot and it continues all the way through assets like Mirage. We're always very very careful in how we deploy capital and ensuring it only goes towards assets that we believe are viable that have a real chance of one day becoming a mine. With these new dikes, do you know how they are oriented underground and how deep they go? So, I mean, the deposit is definitely open at depth. Um, so that's a no-brainer there. But our understanding is most I mean there is an orientation shift. Most of the mineralization is relatively flat. I call it sub30 which is fantastic from uh an open pit perspective. Um some dikes as we approach the fall I mean we're we're kind of in nose of a fault there. Sorry, a nose of a fold. And you know, as you sort of taper off to the side, things sort of steepened out. But that core part where we've done most of the drilling, most of the dikes there are nice and flat, easy to mine stuff. Okay? So that's exactly what you want to be seeing because it means that over a sort of depth, like let's say I take a 100 meter cut, I'm accessing more tons, right? I'm accessing that same dyke over that same 100 meter cut. So from the perspective of geometry and orientation, there's nothing that worries you at this point. No, no, no. I mean, if it was underground, I'd be more worried, but from an open pit perspective, it's exactly what you want to be seeing. Okay. What is the uh the thickness of the overburden here in these new zones and or just in general, talk to me about the thickness of the overburden across the package and how it's distributed across the whole thing. I mean, uh most of these outcrop, so their simple answer is zero at times. uh overburden here. No, never really goes over a few maybe five meters at most, but it it's it's not a major issue. I mean, we're looking we're looking to end up with a strip ratio that's probably going to be sub seven anyway uh from an open pit perspective, which again is fairly realistic. Uh not really anything too surprising there. So again, we're not trying to reinvent the wheel. uh from every the work that we've done, we see a viable asset that just dovetales nicely into all of the other work that's being done and all the other assets that are being discovered in the James Bay. I I asked you about that because and I think you've talked to me about it before that you can actually see some of these pegmatides from from from the sky when you fly over them, but because you the way you described it is that some of them do dip over something. So I thought maybe the the overburden extends to some parts of the deposit or something like that. No. So so so the overburden doesn't really extend more. What would end up happening is I would have more waste rock essentially. Right. So in the core we can see the outcrop. So I mean those ones I mean it's at surface. So there there's no strip there's no none. You just mine into it. And then as you move into the margins as you move on to the side of what we've drilled up till now then it steepens up. It's not a question of having more overance. It's just a question of having more waste rock in that area. But again, it's not anything particularly dramatic from our perspective. It's a it's a pretty based on what we've seen based on the drill results that everything well I mean everything's been result released by now. We're looking at something that is pretty amunable to open pits. I'm not expecting any real surprises on that front. Yeah. So you're not necessarily it's not part of the strategy to go and chase any other dikes that might be undercover and do more geohysics or geocam or something like that. That's not part of the plan right now. Well, so geoysics with pegmatites, I mean, if people start telling you pulling your leg on it, I would be a little bit worried. Um, I mean, there are indirect tools you can use. I'm just not a big fan of them because they remain more of a very much of an indirect proxy. That being said, there are still a lot of geocchem uh potential out there. Case in point, uh we do have another dyke, another spajime bearing dyke 5 kilometers to the north east of where we have mined or it's not mine, but where we've drilled and where we have uh the majority of our previous work completed. this dyke. Uh we drilled it earlier this uh winter, but and we we've discussed this. We actually think we drilled the wrong way at it. So, I mean, we kind of just clipped it. Uh we'll need to go back at a future time and drill it in the correct orientation. It's the way it goes sometimes, you know. Uh but if I go back to uh the strike length, I mean there's no way that between the core of the property where I've drilled and this dyke 4 and 1/2 5 km away, there's a significant potential for more spammy, more lithium mineralization. And so we do have plans in 2026 to do a geocchemical soil and till analysis in that area to start to tie up well look do we see any other anomalies because if we do there's more drill targets. Uh we do see some pegmatites that surface in in between but they seem to be of a different generation and unmineralized but tells you the system is still there nonetheless. So we need to go ahead and do our work. There also happens to be a big lake there. So that could be covering up some of the other targets we would see. You did have um one step out I think to I can find the hole here right for you if I look for a bit longer but it's like a 4 km step out that you did and it didn't come back as you. So that's the one. Yeah. Yeah. That's the one where we we believe we drilled in the wrong orientation. That's the one. Okay. But so you're not defining the you're not outlining sort of the end of the system here. You don't think? No. No. Exactly. I mean this if if you look at the maps that we provide with there, you'll see that that outcrop sits on the side of a lake. Pretty big one out that uh and so the extensions, it's a big lake, but it's a shallow lake like you find anywhere else in this part of the world. And so it could be that the outer splime bearing pegmatites are just buried underneath the lake, so to speak, right under the water. So that's why we just don't see them from surface. Um but they're they happen to be right there. And so from our view it's just a question of let's go back let's go ahead. Uh we do see that's why we want to do more geocchem anomalies or sorry more geochemical work be it uh in the lake itself around the lake get grab some soil samples grab some till samples and try to see if you know we could do wildcat drilling but that's pretty expensive. So, I'm going to try to avoid that as much as I can and do these cheaper tools to start generating more targets. We already have one. We can demonstrate the system continues 4 km away. So, now the question is, well, is that strike link open? Is there more opportunities further to the northeast? Is there more things to be found? That's going to be an objective for us in 2026. We're going to have the core of the project well drilled in our mind. And now the question is, well, what what's the blue sky? What more can we add? And again that that spoime bearing dyke demonstrates that the blue sky is there. The system is still very much alive 4 and a half km away. For all we know it could be that we haven't even drilled the best stuff yet. You just don't know. We need to do the work. Yeah it it's interesting what what kind of stuff are coming up for you here when you do these stepouts. Uh and I do want to talk about how you follow it up. So that that's when I'll ask you about more of the stepouts. But just to the topic of what else you've done, you you you I noticed that in one of those holes that you drilled, there were over 40 small dyes. So it's like a you know swarm or whatever you want to call it intercepted. What's going on there? Cuz they're really really tiny though. So what's going on there? And what does that tell you about the rest of the system? Yeah. So so look there we think that it's there there's a few there's a core of the system where we can see much larger dikes being in place. So that would be things like we called MR3, MR6, you know, these are nice big large bodies. And as we sort of get into the margins of the systems, all right, as we go sort of towards either a fall contact or, you know, as we go down onto the side of the fold, then we're seeing more almost like fingers, right? where it's you're not having the same large space that you would have in the nose of the fold where you can create these large bodies and there you'll have in this case a stacked dyke environment where it's just you know you're just getting a staggering amount of dyke letts to a certain extent um that can actually be mined because as long as dilution is not too severe you know you're taking a large envelope and you're seeing a lot of dyes just stack right next to each other you know you'll have two three meters of mineralization 2 m of uh waste rock, two three more meters of mineralization, again waste rock again, and it just cycles in between those two for 100 m. So it's it's still the system there. Um it's still well mineralized. It's still something that is quite approachable. Something else I noted or noticed is that 27 m pegmatite devolted to uh kukite, if I'm saying that correctly, that's at the lag Orion zone. uh what's going on there? Yeah. So, there it's a actually a very simple answer. Uh this pegmatite happened to be right next to the fault. Uh where you're just having new fluids work its way up the fault and alter the pegmatite itself. So, we actually see this in a dyke like MR6. So, the core of MR6 is nice, it's thick, it's well mineralized, everything. But as you sort of move away from that core, I mean move away like 50 100 m. As you move towards the fault where you had new fluids coming back up, then you start to lose the lit mineralization. Then you as you move on the other side of the fault, oh, it picks back up again. So all you're seeing is that pegmatites near the fault are likely to be altered. And as you move away from the fault, well, they're likely to be unaltered and nice and fresh and contain a lot of splotchamine. It's just a particularity of the overall mineralization system, but it's just that it's nothing really anything special. So, how much of an effect do you think that could have on on the whole depositor or potentially on the um on the resource even that you're going to have to put out? Oh, minor. Oh, no, no, very minor. I mean, that's that's what we have right there. Even something like MR6, which is right well right close to the fault. I mean only a small portion of it has been altered to cookite only the ones I mean essentially for us it means we limit the amount of drilling we do around the fault because even if we are to find pegmmetites there they're more than likely going to be altered right which is why we don't do a lot of drilling there because well why bo right yeah I'm going to find pegmmetites I'll contain minor amount of lithium but not in the right form so all we do is we just stay away from that area and that still gives us ample sort of if you will playing room and ample areas to grow the resource. So what impact does it have? Little to none to be quite honest. Yeah, I was wondering just and I'm talking um you know packagewide so deposit wide if you will. Does it have the potential to influence grade and thickness distribution to a point where it's causing a lot of variability in the resource model making it more challenging or requiring more infill and stuff like that? No. No. Again because it's really constrained to being uh up against the fault. I mean to to to form cockite it's an alteration mineral. So you need to have the fluids come from or you need to have new fluids to come in and alter your pegmatite. So only pegmatites that are in against the fault are at risk of being altered and the a simple fact of just moving away and this is across the entire package then I end up having no alteration and that's frankly that's what we see. So there's no need for extra infill drilling. There's no need for any specific special handling across the project. It just happens to be reality that hey and and this could be applied to any particular project for that matter. If you have a fault where fluids were reactivated, yeah, you could have an alteration uh of the existing pegmatites in that area. So that's what that drilling demonstrated. We wanted to we were targeting another pegmatite. We actually didn't expect to hit a pegmatite up there right next to the fault, but we were unsurprised to see it being after. That's just the reality of what we were drilling. Does it though mean that you might and I'm trying to think kind of from the perspective that you told me that you're thinking about is is you know is this minable? What does this look like in a in a potential mining scenario? Are you going to have to assign sort of different recoveries for that zone or do the main it out of a potential M or have a different circuit or something like that for it? No, it's waste rock. I mean it just the pit wall comes through there. We just ignore it. So it it doesn't make a difference. Again, it does not impact the rest of our project, right? Okay. It's not something that we really see. I mean, it it's it's as like let's say we were drilling in this case, we were drilling a target that was further at depth and we happened to hit this pegmatite near surface. We weren't expecting to hit it. Great. It's a success in the sense we've hit a pegmatite, but we always knew it was never going to be included. It was not what we were targeting when we were drilling in that area. So, does it have any bearing in terms of what we're doing? Frankly, no. I mean, we're not really concerned about it because it was never something we were going to chase anyway. Mhm. Yeah. Well, on the topic of of metallergy, you've done some met work at Mirage. What's going on? What's this uh round of metwork telling you? Yeah. Yeah. So I mean again the the great thing is that on average deposit in the James Bay typically benefit from better than average minology and metallergy relative to global deposits. Spudge mineralization is typically quite low in iron and fairly coarse grain which makes it amanable to DMS dense media separation which is a mechanical type of separation that has a huge benefit from an operating cost and a capital cost perspective because if I look at it from operating costs I don't have to grind the ore I don't have to uh well I don't have to grind it and I don't have to float it right so that's a huge portion of the mill that I don't have to build right so that saves capex that saves opex and because it's a mechanical separation mechanical um I don't really have mine tailings the rejects can go right onto my waist pad I don't need to have a second sort of you know waste pond tailing management all of that goes aside I don't have to deal so again quite significant savings things when it comes to capex and so that's the results that we the work we did earlier this year preliminary results indicate that the project is amanable to DMS now of course we have to do more work of course we need to to further refine everything here but at a first pass it looks like we can avoid you know crushing well sorry not crush grinding and flotation and from that basis significant opex and capital operate or capital expens expenditures. So I mean it's exactly what we want to see and we're happy to see it. So in this case it's not rocket science. It's a very simple you either are or aren't and Mirage is pointing towards it is going to be DMS immunable which is exactly what we want. H. So, so is it does that mean it's um your minology and therefore your metal or so your recoveries are continuous across the package or because I think you did test different domains of the dikes though like is is there much of a difference between how one part of the dyke recovers versus another part of it. So, it's not so much going to be uh dikes themselves although I mean this is typical for all projects. There is a donation in a dyke itself. That's not that's just the way it goes. But we did a mixture of different portions. So it included some stuff from MR3, MR6, MR4, stack dyke. So we we wanted a blend of the entire project. That's what we uh sent out to be tested at this initial stage. Now we'll go in and do further work on each individual dikes. But here's the fun thing. when it when you're dealing with lithium mineralization, you know, just looking at it. I mean, if I'm looking at a dyke and it's all coarse grain and the spamine crystals are all nice and white and there's no micica in there, then yeah, I know exactly what the minology and the metallergy is going to look like. It's not going to be surprising. And so, you know, based on what we see and based on the pictures we've released, anyone that looks at the work we've done can be like, well, yeah, I kind of expect what it's going to give, right? I'm not surprised that it was immunable to DMS. And that's actually a good advantage. And it dovtales also back into our grassroot work. I mean, in the work that we do from the get-go, from day one, from standing on the outcrop, be it in Greenland, on the discovery outcrop in Greenland, we can look at it and be like, "Yeah, this is going to be good," or, "Yeah, this is going to be really tough." Uh, you know, right away what type of metallurgy to expect based just on looking at the dyke itself. And you can't do that in other commodities. I mean you can have a clue maybe an idea but this is something that sorry that is unique to the lithium or the spagmine industry. You can look at it and already have an understanding of what it's going to give. What do what is the uh the target recovery that you have though for that 50 million tons above 1% that you told me? What's a what's a decent rec what's a what's a minable recovery rate? Yeah. So for DMS uh most typically I mean the engineers bring out beautiful charts, the millers bring out beautiful charts but you need a minimum of 60%. DMS is going to be between let's say 60 and 75%. That's what you're targeting with that middle range being around 70%. We're coming out just around 70%. Fine, perfect. That's exactly what you want because the savings I mean you'd be like people would be shocked. Oh my god, you're leaving so much ore behind, right? But the savings are just incalculable. Like to be quite honest, you will never catch up the operating costs increase and the capex cost increase from any operation worldwide unless you're dealing with like a 50-year time horizon. But then on an NPV basis, it you wiped all of those gains out. You even though because once you go to flotation, then you're only increasing it to 85. So that 10% 10 to 15% gain in recoveries it's not worth it. It's never worth it. So if you look globally DMS operations target say 75% plus or minus 5% or 70% plus or minus 5%. Right. But then and that's DMS only. You think you can DMS or do you think you're going to like for in your case would you need DMS and flotation on the back of that? No. That's what our original test work demonstrated that we released earlier this year. Every indications point to DMS only, which is what you want. Best-in-class operations, the lowest cost operations on the lithium side are DMS only. The more you move away from that, i.e. you add flotation or your flotation only, god forbid it's that one, the higher your cost is going to be. H does does whether you can do it depend on the level of delletterious elements you you might have in um in the ore here it's not so much so like anything yes um it's not so much delotterious elements itself it's more delotterious minerals so that's where you have to be careful if you're in a project that has a lot of micica all right a lot of muskavite that can have an impact on your circuit If you have a lot of amphubables, that can have an impact on your circuit. But those are things you can know right off the bat, right? Those are not going to be surprises down the line. You know, be like, "Oh, I never saw this one coming." It's like, "No, you know, from day one. You I could always tell. I can look at my pegmatite and see how much muscoite I have. I can look at my waist rock and calculate, you know, or get a good idea of how much dilution I'm going to get and how much amphubables I'm going to put into uh my ore that gets sent to the mill. Those are things that I know from day one. And that again is something that is unique to the lithium industry. There's good projects start good. There's no real major supplies that comes down the line. Oh, it was always refractory. No, I mean that's not a concept that we have to be worried about. Do you does it have to be DMS? I mean that 50 million tons that you're hoping for here at 1% would it work if it's not DMS even even having to pay up that upfront capex that would be larger in that case? I mean it's like anything the simple answer is yes. And another project to be clear let's be honest here the operations on Australia are DMS plus flotation. Okay. So, it's quite it's kind of unique and we're going for best-in-class, but it kind of speaks in my mind to the uniqueness of the Quebec environment. Uh because on average, the deposit here are DMS only. But if you go to Australia, they are DMS plus flotation. So, it's not like they don't work. Of course, they work. It's just classically you're higher cost. You're higher on the cost curve. I mean, in a in a low price environment, that has an impact, right? Is it the difference between, hey, is this an uh an asset that goes bankrupt? Is this an asset that wants to be acquired? Those are all sort of the considerations that end up, you know, deciding whether you go bankrupt or you get acquired. So, in my mind, absolutely, these things still work. There's still great projects out there that are DMS plus flotation. Lyft. Lyft's a great asset. You mean it's it's lots of room to grow. It could be bigger. It's most likely DMS plus flotation. Does that make a problem? No. But it does mean there'll be higher cost than winsome in Quebec, which is DMS only. That's just a reality. I mean, that's not that's just the way it goes. They have less, you know, manipulation of the ore than the other guys, which means they go lower they go lower on the cost curve. That's not particularly special. Well, that's what I'm asking though. I'm asking about uh does it work from an economical standpoint like could Mirage and again this is very very forward-looking and and potentially and everything but could Mirage get financed even if it's not DMS even if if or if it's DMS and flotation would the economics on those potential 50 million tons at 1% would they still make sense to do you know a DMS plus flotation or just a a standard operation? Yes, of course. The the economics still work. The question is they're just not as good. It's it's it's that simple. So, instead of aiming for a 30% IR, and again, these are all crazy forward-looking statements, you end up looking at a 20% IR. And and funny enough, we did that exercise internally two, three years ago, I guess two and a half years ago now. um we made you know fictitious operations uh with fictitious 50 million ton uh deposits and kind of gave ourselves okay well what happens if it's DMS only what happens if it's DMS post flotation what happens if it's flotation only and again this this is more now a mathematical calculation and everything else and there is a 5 to 10% drop in IRRa and a $100 million drop in NPV in each time you drop, you know, each step. So DMS, you go down to DMS plus flotation, you lose 5 to 10%, you lose on your IR, you lose $100 million of your MPV. And then if you go flotation only, you lose another $100 million and you lose a another 5 to 10%. So I mean, every operation the world over needs to figure out where they on which step they sit. And obviously the further you are down that step, you better have a lot of tons or a lot of grades to make it worthwhile, right? So the minimum threshold to justify an investment just goes up. So maybe if it's flotation only, we need more tons. Maybe actually we need 75 million tons to justify it. Maybe we need 80 million tons. Maybe we need a higher input price. Maybe the input price is not $1,500 a ton spammy. Maybe the input price is 2,000 a ton spammy and vice versa. If you're DMS only, maybe you only need a,000 tons input price to make it work. Those are all classic consideration that every industry is going to be faced with. But again, indication work, the work that we've done to date points towards DMS only. So top that first step where you want to be. How do you follow it up then from here on out on Mirage again? memory by the end of this year or early next year that's still I mean it's right around the corner so there do you have to do more infill drilling is what you have enough for an inferred yeah what do you what what are the next steps so that's that's actually it's a fantastic question that's what we're doing right now internally we're understanding hey you know do we find that we need a little bit more is there areas that we should drill a little bit off because to your point you know we've been doing stepouts and maybe the you know the geology ologist who's going to do the resource for us. A resource modeler says, "Yeah, I don't feel comfortable with this too far of a step out." So, you got to put a hole in between if you wanted to be included. So, we're going through that exercise right now. We're fairly confident, but we just need to make sure anyway that we hit our numbers. We don't want to come out and be like, "Oh, no, we only have 30 million tons cuz we were stepping out too far or anything of that nature." We want to make sure that it is something that is a strong resource that is defendable and that we can definitely hang our hat around. Goes back to that minability statement that we keep talking about. And so it just flows into there. So we're evaluating right now to your point. It's right around the corner. Maybe we do a little bit more drilling, maybe we don't. We're going to make that decision shortly, but it's going to lead towards that resource metallergical work. There's maybe a few more tests we want to do. uh just so everyone feels nice and and comfortable around it but we've done most of the work we might start to do you know selective across okay well just MR6 just MR4 what does the metal the metallergy look like just for that one but forcibly it's not really going to change much because again we we have a good understanding at this point in time so just by looking at it and again seeing that first round of results we saw no surprise we expect no surprise to be quite honest So that's why we're going to continue doing that work. We're then evaluating once we have that resource out. We're evaluating what we want to do already at this point in time in 26. We know we want to do more geochem work. We know we want to drill some of at the very least stuff that's well outside the MRE. I mean I it bugs me so much uh that dyke that's 4 and 1/2 km outside that we drilled in the wrong direction. Trust me, I want to drill that one real bad. So, you know, we'll go ahead and uh and see what needs to be done around there, but we we have plans on being quite active around Mirage into next year. Does being active include looking for the source of the Boulder Field? It it does. I mean, absolutely. Those all sort of dovetail into into everything that we're doing, right? So, it goes back to the the Boulder Field uh to the Southwest. I mean, there's still a lot more work that needs to be done there. Uh, it's just a question of using capital in a judicious fashion. I mean, if I had $50 million in my bank account and the stock was trading at $5, then you'd be sure that I'd be doing a heck of a lot more stuff, but I have to be careful and I have to do things in a way that is highly impactful for the company and for shareholders. Doing wildcat drilling is not exactly one of those. Mhm. What what what's going on with this Boulder field though and its source? I mean, it's been a while since you've wanted to find it. Do you think you're going to find it or is it kind of the uh you know, the the ever escaping thing? I mean, it's it's just a question. We haven't put enough time into it. I mean, if you remember, we discovered Mirage just as the lithium market turned. And so we've been spending the last 2 years in a significantly weaker lithium environment, if you will, pricing environment. And so we've had to manage ourselves in that reality. So we haven't been able to do as much work there as we would like. And again, it goes back to a question of being high impact, right? I could spend $5 million drilling around there and trying to find the source and understanding it. Or I can use $5 million to make discoveries in Greenland and other locations and maybe find another equivalent mirage out over there, right? To find a similar and all of a sudden it's like, oh, I just don't have mirage. Now I have two miages and actually I found a third one. So now I have three miages, right? Three equivalent size assets. So it goes back to, you know, what we said at the start. Companies often will put all of their eggs in one basket, which which is fine. I mean, that's a strategy, but we find that this is a unique opportunity on lithium side. There's still so many undiscovered things that we want to continue growing as a company, still leverage our strength. And people forget it. I mean at the end of the day, junior mining, what's the strength of a junior mining company? And I know we put the word mining, but the strength of juniors is to explore. The strength of juniors is to find things. But we have this sort of twisted imagination that every company should be a minor, every company should be mining assets. And I I don't fully agree. Sometimes it makes sense, but play to your strength. I mean, you're not going to tell me that a company that has like 20 employees is the is better than tech at building, you know, a $4 billion asset. No, tech does that type of work. Tech has entire departments that do this type of work. And so, what's tech not good at? Tech's not that great at finding things. tech doesn't have a full, you know, is not as flexible and as aggressive as a junior might be. And that's what we like to bring to the table at Brunswick. Any competent engineer, any competent GEO can continue advancing Mirage and and we're competent and we have a competent team that can do that, but our strength has always been to find things. That's what we bring to the table. That's what we bring to our investors, our ability to go into an area that did not have lithium before, like Mirage, like Greenland, and say, "Hey, look at that. Based on our understanding of geology and the potential here, wouldn't you know, we found some lithium." And that is our strength, and that's what we want to continue delivering to shareholders so that when the lithium markets do turn around, they're not like, "Oh, good job for you. you've brought Mirage to a feasibility study. I sure hope you catch this cycle to either build it or sell it. But we come out and say, "Hey, look, you know what? We have a portfolio of assets that might be very attractive to a major out there that wants to expand quite dramatically its pipeline of projects cuz it has an asset in Quebec which is developing very quickly and that gets to play in that whole geopolitical sphere. And now they have an asset in Greenland that plays into the European political sphere that's growing nicely. And maybe they have another asset, another jurisdiction that's also growing there quite rapidly and is also benefiting from new geopolitical realities. So that's what we want to offer out there and it's something that not a lot of people are doing in any commodity. Gold, copper, uh lithium, obviously zinc doesn't make a difference. This is not some it's what used to be done but shockingly it's not what's being done right now and uh that's why I want to push back against it. I want to be out there using the strength of our team to make discoveries. That's what excites the market, right? The classic Lan curve. It's classic for a reason. Let's go ahead and make discoveries. Well, you're doing some work in Greenland right now, but you're not yet drilling if I'm not mistaken. when do you think you're going to be drilling in Greenland? So, I mean, that's what we're currently uh looking at closely right now. It's a more question of logistic and cost more than anything else. I mean, you can drill more or less year round, but obviously drilling in the winter months carries a higher cost burden, right? So, more dilution. We want to just make sure that we're judicious in the way we spend our capital. Uh our discovery in Greenland is now at a drill ready stage. So now it's a question of getting the permits in time to drill it. I mean, if I get my permits in October, do I really want to be drilling in January? Probably not if I'm being realistic. Again, I can drill year round. It's just not the greatest to be doing so, you know, in January, February, March. You might as well just wait out a few more months and do it correctly, if you will. Right. We you and I did a Greenland focused episode a couple of months ago where we talked about specifically about Greenland, whether mining and everything else is going to work there. What is the situation from the permitting perspective for you now though? What else you have to get? And and when I say permitting, I don't really mean government permitting them having you being permitted to actually do the work, which actually uh entails much more than just the government. So, it's the locals, it's it's the ESG principle and everything else. So what else do you have to do in order to be drilling in Greenland? Yeah. So actually that's two great things on that front. First of all, Greenland really understands mineral exploration well. So they're quite competent on that front. The other thing that's really good with Greenland is it's sparsely populated, right? So even the case of our Nook asset, it's not near any population basin, right? It's not near, you're not bothering a neighbor, so to speak, right? So, I mean, obviously, we hold ourselves to a very high AG standard across any of our projects, across any particular jurisdiction. So, that's no real change there to be quite honest. And we don't expect any major new requirements in uh in Greenland relative to where we've drilled in Canada. It's going to be the same thing. But from our social acceptability, it's it's kind of kind of amazing. The team that was there this summer, they're like, it's it's fun to be in areas where everyone wants to hear about what you're doing that's motivated to hear what mines can bring to the economy. I mean, we like to think that Canada's a great mining jurisdiction, but we kind of forget. Um, and you know, it has some push in the government to to move ahead on mining, but nothing like Greenland. Nothing like seeing a country that wants to build mines. That's the difference. They want to build mines in Greenland. And so they put all time of the day to advance these types of assets to to ensure that companies are permitted. Could it be faster? Sure. Like anything, I'm always going to say yes. anything could be faster, but it's not really any slower than Quebec for that matter. You know, Quebec is still two to three months to get your drill permits. That's kind of the same thing in Greenland. Um, that's exactly what you want to see. And there's no other companies have drilled there. It's not really anything too, we've looked at what's required from that. It's not anything too dramatic. There's no major surprises. As long as you're a good corporate citizen, things should go pretty well. And we pride ourselves on being a good corporate citizen. So, I see no reason why things shouldn't go well. Is the same true for your relationship with the locals and and you know, essentially having them let you drill where you want to drill. Oh, absolutely. I mean, to to understand the the local, I mean, it it's it's a nation that wants to see mines. the the population is pro-mining. They want to see asset. They're just an asset that was permitted um earlier this year, Greenland Resources, for a Molly mine or a Molly project that they're hoping to mine. Uh we have some claims around there. It's on the other coast. It's on the other side on the eastern coast, but it's it's no different anywhere else. It and and that's what was quite fun for our team when they were there. The local population is promining. Everyone wants to to show the rocks that they collected to our geos while they were down there at the grocery store. It's like, "Oh, you're doing geological work. Should come to my yard and see the work the the fun rocks that I have there." People are supportive of the mining industry in Greenland, which is something that we find very very uh fantastic to work because look, it's it's there. they live, you know, if you take a step back and understand the economy of Greenland, it's not like they have farmland. It's not like they have, you know, utter cottage industry. It's it's fishing and tourism, right? So, if you're not impacting those two areas, there's nothing really that impedes uh the mining industry. And so, that's as supportive as you can possibly have. Yeah. What would a reasonable first pass through your program be to test your Greenland thesis and and specifically from the perspective of what I'm thinking about here is I understand you don't have the details for that but I'm thinking about money. How much money are you going to need in order to get a yes or a no from Greenland? I mean again that's the fun thing when you're drilling unlike drilling let's say for gold you know you're drilling for assets that carry a certain size. So, you know, after 3 to 5,000 m, you already have a good idea, right? You you don't if if I'm drilling after 5,000 m if and I keep drilling like 5 m wide dikes, I'll be honest with you, I'm not building 50 million tons with from that, right? You need to have things that are more like 20, 30, 40, 50 m plus consistently to know that you're going to hit something that looks minable. So take take an example. I mean it it's not a great example because we've we decided to abandon it but it still follows our guiding principles of we're looking for size. We drilled an asset in Quebec Elron. It looked pretty big from surface. It was one dyke which gave us some amount of hesitation. Uh unlike Greenland which is a multitude of dikes, unlike Mirage which is a multitude of big dikes. You know that's something that's great. But when it came to to this Elron asset in Quebec, we planned to do 2,000 mters. Well, I'll be honest, after 750 mters, we knew it was never going to be 5,000. It was never going to be 50 million tons. So, we we stopped drilling right away and we pulled out. We moved on. You don't have to overcommit on these assets. You can be quite judicious in capital spend and ensure that you know you're maximizing your dollars. We're about to start a campaign uh that's partially funded by the Quebec government here in a few weeks at Anata, an asset that's next to Riot Tinto. And you know, we're we're planning 2,000 m of drilling there, but it's going to depend on what we're doing. If after 1,000 m I'm not seeing the results that I want, then why would I throw away, you know, good money after bad? That doesn't make any sense. Again, we're we're very very strict in terms of how we work these assets. We're really we're we're you know, our view is we're we're just like an investor. If it doesn't move the needle, if we don't believe it's going to move the needle, we're out. We're moving on. We're going to something else. How much money do you have right now? So, right now, we have uh working capital is around $3 million. Okay. That's What is that going to be enough for? Is it going to get you to and through to MRE or Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It gets me to MRE. It gets me into 2026. It gets me into deciding what my plan is for next year. We've we're working on a number of different things. Like I said, we're about to do an MRE, but we're also going to start a new drill program uh at Aneta because it's partially funded by the Quebec government. So, you know, there's a significant amount of upside left and we have uh some few things that we're working on in the background that we hope to make announcements over the coming weeks, which will probably warrant another interview by then, but we'll save that for the future. Um, but we have a full slate well into 2026 of exploration work of making discoveries. I know you got to run now, so it might be a good idea to do that uh the rest of that conversation in that future interview. And for people listening and watching, if I'm forgetting to ask something, please let me know. I'll ask it in our next interview. Keane, what do you think? What's the uh what's the most fair criticism you've heard of Brunswick so far this year? You know, it's there's there's two. I'll set aside like, oh, I wish this stock was trading at 30 cents, which I also was going to be critical of myself for that one. But setting aside that, I think I think it's understanding what we're trying to do. There's a lot of people that will look at Mirage and say, "Ah, this is this type of company. This is like Winom. This is like all these other companies that are advancing assets." And don't get me wrong, we are a little bit of that. But it's understanding the upside, understanding the entire opportunity, right? That's how we started the company. and we said, "Hey, we're going to explore across all of Canada cuz no one's ever gone ahead and done this work." And we want to continue doing that because that's upside that is not captured by any other company out there. And you know, there are still more discoveries to be found and I want to be sure that Brunswick is doing those. So, expect us to be very, very active. Expect us to be again Greenland was fantastic to do. We're going to do more like that. I promise you, we're going to go to areas that have never seen lithium expiration and we're going to add them to the portfolio and we're going to make discoveries there and people are going to be like, "Wow, gee, I sure I sure wish I thought of that before." And we're like, "Well, we already did." So, that's what we want to deliver to our investors. It's something that is absolutely unique out there. Well, yeah, let's uh follow it up uh next time, hopefully sooner this time. But I really do appreciate you sitting down, me. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you. Pleasure as always. And as always, thanks to everyone for watching Resource Talks. I have a couple of more things to say, though. The fact that this company was interviewed here today does not mean that they're necessarily a good or a bad company. I'm not here to endorse nor attack anyone. I am simply here to ask some questions. If you find that I have failed in asking a question that you would have liked to hear an answer to, which will happen as I'm not an experienced interviewer, please let me know and I will try to correct that mistake in a future interview. As mentioned at the beginning, please understand that mineral exploration and development is an extremely risky business. Losing money is the norm and should be the expectation. This is a very complex sector and the performance of individual companies typically depends on many different moving particles including company specific factors like geology, financing ability and many others really as well as particles that are outside of the company's control like geopolitics, macroeconomics, commodity prices and many more. Most of which are nearly impossible to fully understand. Moreover, these companies that typically get interviewed on resource talks are in the pre-revenue stage, which means they rely on the public markets for the financing of their operations, which could result in shareholder dilution. Furthermore, as a general rule of thumb, you'll be better off understanding that all company communications online, albeit this interview or their website and their presentation and their social media accounts or even the social media accounts which you thought were your friends and then told you about a stock, everything really that these companies do is intended as marketing. And although I do not make buy or sell recommendations because there is a clear conflict of interest given the nature of my business, many out there do and you should be aware of that in bias and you should be careful out there. That bias is not always going to be clearly disclosed with everyone out there. So it is safer for you anytime you're watching any type of company specific content to approach it with a dose of skepticism and assume that the party telling you about it is biased in at least some shape or form because there will always be a bias again albeit clear or not. So, always ask yourself what the incentive of your counterparty is and never rely on them regardless of their incentives, but in instead double check if what they're saying is true again by using setter plus.ca. The fact that I have no idea what I'm doing should already be clear to you at this point. I am not saying this to make jokes or or laugh with myself. I just simply do not have a long enough track record of consistent investment profit. So, I should under no circumstances be considered an authority on anything. Again, although this may sound amusing to you, believe me, it is not amusing and it is not intended as a joke. I'm simply pointing out a fact and warning you not to rely on anything I do or say. Unfortunately, at least to my understanding, nobody out there has any special abilities. The CEOs do not possess any superior knowledge and they cannot know about what will go up, what will go down, or what will go in circles. Some people even believe that to be rule number one on Wall Street. Nobody really knows. None of us know whether any of the company's activities will result in a success. Again, given that we're talking about high-risk activities where most of the times it ends in failure. Also, unfortunately, try as I may, I won't always catch all red flags or all challenges with the companies. So, even if I did ask a few tough questions in here, don't rely on this being all of the tough questions. Again, these are complicated startups with many moving parts and I am conflicted given the nature of this business. Therefore, I cannot guarantee the quality of anything presented in this video and you cannot hold me responsible for any losses or damages stemming from the way you decide to use this interview. Viewers, listeners, and readers acknowledge and agree that the information presented herein did not constitute a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any security or investment or to participate in any trading strategy. Resource talks and all parties involved in the management of the business strictly disclaim any and all liability for losses and or damages whether direct, indirect, special or consequential or other consequences however so cost arising out of any use or reproduction of the content published by resource talks or any decision made or action taken in reliance upon it. By consuming this content, all consumers vow to release resource talks and all parties involved in the management of the business from all claims, proceedings, or consequences. This is all to say, I know it's a lot of lawyer talk, but this is all to say that you shouldn't blindly trust me or anybody on the internet, and you should do your own research. Once again, social media is meant for entertainment. It is setplus.ca, where you do your research. That's where you find a company's official filings. And I encourage you to read and analyze the management information circular, the financial statements, the management discussion and analysis, and whenever available, the NI43101 technical documents. If you don't understand everything in those documents, the chances of you losing money are even higher than they normally are in this space. And as mentioned earlier, the chances of even the best analysts in this sector losing money are extremely high since this is venture capital and it is not for everybody. I'll leave you with one of Charlie Mer's quotes which I wish I had listened to more often earlier on which says quote if you don't understand it don't do