Ann: FY2013 Results Media Release , page-35

As I have often written, these contracts are by their nature civil works (they are not contracted mining services) and civil works contracts tend to be small, quickly delivered and they are usually followed up by extensions, or other work from the same customer. Treat it as the harbinger of more good news.

With my average buy price of $1.34, I am now (11:20AM, 30/08/20130) roughly square in respect to my NWH punt, and as that buy price accommodated the low EPS and DPS forward estimates as mooted by the Thomson Consensus Estimates (TCEs), I do not expect negative surprises. The TECs for NWH appear to be brutally honest, perhaps too pessimistic, and my gamble is that surprises will be to the upside. The TECs are currently:

- - - - - - 2013 - -- 2014 - - - 2015
EPS - -- 26.5¢ - - 18.8¢ - - - 17.1¢
DPS - - 13.0¢ - - - 9.4¢ - - - - 8.4¢

I have written often enough about the themes that should help NWH – that is, Pilbara Iron Ore volumes and brownfields expansion, Royalties for Regions and other government infrastructure-building initiatives, Indigenous-advancement initiatives, plus the dividend yield. I have also previously mentioned that NWH had taken some of the negative blows early by reducing headcount in FY2013 and lowering revenue expectations flowing from Fortescue’s move to cancel its Solomon and Christmas Creek iron ore ventures and the deceleration of Rio's Simandou iron ore venture in Guinea.

One point that I was aware of and have not mentioned relates to NWH's exposure to the ailing coal-mining industry. NWH took the hit in 2H2013 when its mining services contract at Middlemount was reduced to a dry-hire contract. I am not sure, but I do not think NWH has other significant coal-related exposures.

On balance, therefore, I think surprises from NWH should tend to the upside.