Ann: Havilah Secures Funding of up to $100M from GFG Alliance, page-82

"I noticed in CAP's recent webinar, their CEO mentioned talks with GFG for port access. Do you think GFG approached both but HAV folded first? "

I think we can say with some certainty that GFG/SIMEC would have been in talks with both HAV and CAP.

I suspect that GFG/SIMEC would prefer an equity based transaction or at least one that gives them control of the project that they are investing in. Given Grants is relatively undeveloped, the current state of HAV's board and cash position, relatively easy to achieve that with HAV.

However, much harder to achieve any sort of control with CAP because they are more advanced and have already set out their plan to obtain BFS funding - and much harder for GFG/SIMEC to obtain control. However, that is not to say that GFG/SIMEC would not still be interested in part of CAP's Hawsons project. But the difference between CAP and Hawsons is that CAP will find another customer to take a percentage of Hawons production whereas HAV needs to find another buyer for the hole of Grants or the company.

In considering GFG's desire for control, from memory, they are going to float 40% of steelworks and associated - i.e., GFG would still hold control.