The thing about that article that frustrated me was the claim in the opening paragraph that "it just seemed to good to be true", referencing the production cost of a barrel of fuel from UCG-GTL.
The last paragraph of the article makes the statement "it WAS a claim that was too good to be true", referencing the $20 trillion SAPEX Adelaide Advertiser debacle from last week. This is meant to be the king hit to the headline "Linc Energy fuel claims under question" [by who I might add?]
Sorry, but does this fool not realise he's comparing two completely unrelated things in his facetious claims? This is the third time in two weeks a journo has got it completely wrong.
People say any publicity is good publicity, and I guess on that note we should be happy. I just expect more from the Age.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- LNC
- fuel claims
fuel claims, page-18
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 2 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add LNC (ASX) to my watchlist
Currently unlisted public company.
The Watchlist
JBY
JAMES BAY MINERALS LIMITED
Andrew Dornan, Executive Director
Andrew Dornan
Executive Director
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online