are, are largely in hand. So, um, we could be, uh, well placed potentially to merge fairly quickly with that one. Great. Thank- thanks, Del. If I can just sneak one last one in, just wondering if you guys have a rough, um, swift of product that goes into hydroxide versus carbonate converters, and, and whether or not that was changed substantially since those bigger, bigger increases in carbonate frothing versus the hydroxide froth? Yeah, our customers, the contracted customers do a mix of both, so it's very difficult to determine exactly how much goes into the carbonate chemical suite versus hydroxide. But to be honest, in today's environment, you can, you can be ambi- ambivalent about it because any, any, um, primary hydroxide producer, IE straight from inaudible hydroxide it's probably three things, hydroxide through carbonate, a very low cost process of carbonation to take advantage of, of the carbonate price. So, and actually in the scheme of things, they're doing that for us with the same cost of, cost of chemical conversion carbonate anyway, um, because the primary hydroxide route would typically be a bit cheaper. Um, so from our point of view, we're, we're not overly fussed kind of one, one way or the other. We're ultimately being consumed, but given the price differential between carbonate and hydroxide, that, that's very much a likely market response twisting hydroxide to carbonate. Great, thanks Ken. Thanks very much guys. Appreciate it. Thank you. The next question is from Mitch Ryan from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Uh, good morning guys, just inaudible. Yeah, good question, Mitch, and it's hard to disagree with the logic that there's a small volume and a small price point that are established on such a platform. Uh, the better the combination of price transparency and market development for more sophisticated market tools to emerge. So broadly speaking, we're supportive of, of an objective that creates more products pricing on things like the BMX platform. Uh, so we're very open to those discussions, and it won't surprise you that those discussions, you know, are already underway. It seems like a very, very logical model to deploy, and it is the industry is absolutely crying out for, for stronger price, price transparency. inaudible you wouldn't necessarily be looking for a commercial benefit. I mean, a material commercial benefit, it would be more about the improvement, going to the market would benefit all players involved, I guess. That's right. Right in time, floats four boats. So, so yeah, it's pretty much that, that logic, and, and ultimately it's gonna be good for the market as a whole, because it gets more sophisticated methodology out there. Uh, we're not interested so much in the commercial potential, in, in that model. We're more interested version across all products, and, and in fact, Tilburn Minerals itself is also keen to put more cross points on the platform, IE, you know, exploring grades over time, and midstream products, and, and who knows. Uh, maybe our own lithium chemicals over time. Thanks, Ken. Thanks for answering my questions. Thank you. The next question comes from Jack Gabb from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Thanks. Uh, hi Ken. Uh, just a couple of questions from me. Firstly, just on the labor challenges, and particularly with respect to, uh, some of the stripping, I guess. This year was gonna be a bit of a catch up year for, for stripping rates. I'm just curious, is it going to pose a, a challenge at some point? Is it going to create a bottleneck for you, as you look to expand, or are you, have you got quite a lot of, uh, headway on that? Just that on my question, thanks. Yeah, Jack, a couple of introductory comments on that subject, and I'll hand to Dale. Yeah, you're right, this year, it was all about catch up, and we had about sort of 15 to 18 months worth of, of, uh, higher than light of mine strip to catch up. Uh, that's, that's dissipated, mobilizing more fleet, and larger fleet. It's been constrained by labor, so, so that's part of the challenge. Dale, is there anything else you want to add? Uh, the only thing I would add is, with the acquisition of Altura, for them more opportunities, with the access to all, so, uh, without question, there's a heap of material for ways movement, but, uh, we do have multiple areas to draw from, uh, so that puts us in fairly good stead as we think about various mine plans, et cetera. That's what I'd add. Perfect, thanks. And then just one on pricing. Can you give us a sense of, uh, the range, I guess, of your pricing, that you actually are seeing across your contracts, ignoring the BMX for a second, uh, within your guidance? And then, secondly, within that guidance as well, are you including any material volumes from the BMX platform at this point? Thanks. Uh, so Jack, on the second question first. Uh, in fact what we have described in the quarterly, 2600 to 3000 US dollars a pound represents an estimate of contracted pricing. So, uh, what we see today. Uh, so it's only, only contracted pricing excludes whatever might yet occur on the BMX platform. Uh, and I understand that there's probably a rich further outside of the function of the speed with which chemical has accelerated. Uh, oh, and yeah, sorry, the first question. Uh, actually, it's a relatively tight, uh, contract pricing across the customer group. There's really no material difference emerging, uh, in respect of the various pricing models. So that's pretty much approximated each other, within a couple of hundred dollars, you know, of, of each individual contract. Uh, and they do vary at a time, because they do use lots of different pricing modeling, but it's in the data. They all reference, uh, lithium… well, technically all reference lithium chemical. Uh, potentially that's a slightly different way, but the net outcome of the pricing is pretty tight. Thanks for your help, all. Thanks very much. I'll, uh, leave it there. Thank you. The next question comes from Peter Ker from the Australian Financial Review. Please go ahead. Good day Ken, thanks for your time. Uh, just wondering on the border, I assume you're not going to join the exodus of, uh, all the other inaudible who are coming next. Uh, and secondly, with the February fires delay, did that upend any plans you had in terms of, you know, did you have, uh, particular markets on the east coast you were targeting, as of Feb 6th? And, uh, yeah, how do you sort of cope now, with that, with that sort of indefinite uncertainty? Yeah, good question, Peter. Uh, I can assure you there was lots of cares in the Brisbane household, uh, with the border. Don't shut, February fires, given their locations, and, and, uh, the desire to catch up with them. Uh, with respect to work, uh, no, not my intention to merge with Melbourne, or, or Sydney. Uh, not any time soon. And didn't disrupt plans, well, the indirect impact