MIN $10 Share Price, page-269

Won't keep going on about it but someone mentioned that a good portion of Onslow production was contracted. But at what price? Spot?

Having set up a centralised buying office the Chinese buyers would like nothing more than to bring on huge loads of future supply supported by huge Capital outlays funded by the suppliers leaving little option but to deliver. Even better if the supplier is under debt pressure.

The buyers are behaving rationally. It's not their job to ensure their suppliers are profitable. Have a look at the quality and volumes produced by MGX over the last 10 years or more. Not much in the way of dividends so where have all the profits gone? Not to small retail shareholders by the look of it.

Hard to know what was driving MIN when they stretched themselves this far but ego and hubris probably feature in there somewhere and it's damaging the whole sector imho. They're like a Tasmanian potato farmer investing millions in supply only for Simplot and the supermarkets to say "sorry guys, can only pay 20c kilo coz there's an oversupply of spuds".

A lesson for those who continually complain about taxes and royalties. Without them (or some form of cartel like OPEC) a dominant buyer will just create a race to the bottom. They're called commodities for a reason folks.....