game over for iron ore, page-5

fishmo,

Sure,

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theaustralian.news.com.au%2Fstory%2F0%2C20867%2C21632020-5001942%2C00.html&ei=zRJRRom7OqL4ggOA-uCGDQ&usg=AFrqEzcpqaNlWEH4F_dQ4_3MT3ydK7EjGw&sig2=33BRgPK0xe4721qPveocwg

It's only a short paragraph though.

haematite,

Bad wording on my part, I meant 450mt each. It's a long stretch I know - but personally believe RIO and BHp are capable of reaching such targets. IN the AFR recently they quoted a guy from RIO who said they're looking at the 400mtpa region in the future, while BHP have also said they're doing conceptual plans for output of 400mpta.

I can't see any bottlenecks preventing them from doing so, RIO has a resource base of 11,000mt in the Pilbara alone, so even if they took it to 400mt they've got a 30 year mine life right there without any additional exploration.

It'd be a good move from a RIO shareholders point of view IMHO, the margins they make per tonne of ore are incredible at well over 50%, so doubling their production would mean big profits.

youngneil,

None taken, at the end of the day we're all punters betting on a point of view. Some people believe iron ore profits will stay high well into the future, some don't. I'm in the latter camp. Having said this I think Kerr Neilson's belief that anchoring yourself to the past can be a dangerous thing is worth considering here. At the end of the day the stocks' value is determined by future profits - past results, conditions, etc rarely mean anything.