jabiluka still on, says era , page-2

Hey LD,
unfortunately, the article is a little misleading :
ERA has not decided to wait for land owner approval :
Rio have.
The distinction is significant.
No, ERA did not give the project up : Rio snatched it from them. No matter how ERA's board may be sweating on jabiluka, it's their parent company who have staked their good name on the commitment to mothball this most controversial of uranium projects.

I really don't see how Ms Margarula's sharing traditional knowledge about the cultural significance of this area amounts to demonstrating ignorance. Whether we like it or not, there's more than one world view that is relevant in analysing this stock, and I am grateful for any insight into the mindset of the locals. Surely to wish away the world view of the land owners is itself wilful ignorance!

Of course, I do recognise that many of our colleagues treat their stock like their footy team, cheering the side along, while shrugging off any uncomfortable evidence to the contrary. I often wince when I hear these ignorant shareholders superstitiously rejecting any information that may reflect negatively on their holdings. Well, good luck to them.
For my part, I recommend that appreciation of the power balance and motivations of stakeholders might be vital ingredients to a good investment decision.

for completeness, here's a tv interview with Rob Atkinson re Jabiluka last Friday:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2011/04/15/3193218.htm