objective analysis of today's events, page-33

Rorkes - thanks for the kind comments :)

And the media got it wrong - simple as that.

You could see the misinterpretation spreading - it started with the Bloomberg article, that needed to be edited 4 times as information came in, but was written BEFORE the IAEA report was released. It also claimed to have information from "an unnamed source who is familiar with the situation". Yeah right..! But that article was syndicated onwards via AAP.

Then we have the hatchet-job article in the New York Times about the engineering of the plant. Lynas responded to that, but I wouldn't rule out further action (possibly legal) if no retraction or apology is forthcoming from the NYT.

And I wouldn't rule out the possibility that the article was a "sponsored" job. Molycorp interests behind it? Who knows. But it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a newspaper either completely fabricated a story (several have been sued and lost for doing just that, especially in the UK), or used illegally obtained emails and/or phone taps.

Article in the Business Section of today's Australian is a bit more balanced. The reporter talks about a 3-month delay - which would be about the maximum.

Another "analyst" from Dalmans in the US is still prattling on about 2013 for first production - but they're the brokers who sponsored Molycorp, and they have always been very anti-Lynas, to boost the MCP share price over there, so this would have seemed like a heaven-sent opportunity for him.

Trust me - this will climb over the next few weeks - maybe not in one big blast, but a nice steady step-wise uptrend from here would do me nicely, thank you

And If JP Morgan - who incidentally are one of the major shareholders in LYC - have a target of $2.79, and that is likely to be revised upwards as timelines become clearer, then I'm happy to hold.