buy buy buy, page-100

A

Thanks for your response.

You state:

"AGL/LYP desperately NEED a drying solution and Exergen have the HUGE partners to make it happen...so WHY have Exergen failed? "

Let's view this from a different POV - maybe we should be saying instead of "so why have Exergen failed?" - we could ask why did Exergen not accept the AGL/LYP terms of supply? As well, we could ask why have Exergen moved on BM first?

From my reading, Exergen and ESI have not been the only companies looking for a coal supply. By my count there are around a dozen.

With Exergen moving on BM, Exergen now have assured a BC supply with the MNM 50/50 JV. It is also fair to say with MNM acquiring over 600+ sq km of prime LV dirt, Exergen would also be eyeing off what MNM have in the LV.

Again, why did Exergen not accept the AGL/LYP terms of supply?, and why did Exergen chose to move at BM first? These are the questions you should really be asking.

This was a key failing of WEC in their upgrading of Indonesian sub-bituminous coals as supply costs increased making their product uneconomic.

My recollection was that AGL have valued the BC in the LY deal at something around $70 per tonne. My memory on this is fuzzy, please correct me if I am wrong.

To then "buy" this BC from AGL, apply a BCE tech, transport out of LV, ship O/S...and sell for $90 per tonne to be on par with black coal - well it doesn't make economic sense.

As discussed suitable infrastructure out of the LV is realistically a decade away, perhaps less with a slurry pipeline.

Exergen now have 1 billion tonnes of BC at BM, will spend their own money to build a $50+ mill commercial demo plant, have rail to port in place and an off take agreement with Tata Power of India. Additionally, Exergen have rec'd $2 mill in Govt grants to date, been on a trade trip with Ted to India recently, been involved (as was MNM) in the Vic Parliament Greenfields Enquiry, have progressed the DICE tech with CSIRO and been mentioned numerous times in the media recently.

I believe, the export economics of the BM project far exceed the export economics of a LV project. Of course, Exergen have also stated they will spend $450 mill of their own money to build the slurry pipeline out of LV as well.

OK, so as BY so eloquently states - "CHTD is a dud". If this was true, do you really think any of the above would (and have been) occuring???

OK, so you all believe Coldry is the leader and the best tech. No problem, I have always said Coldry has legs. I have always said I just don't see where ESI are going to get the cash to get Coldry to proven commercial level before being (more) massively diluted - I'm still waiting to get a decent answer on that one.

ESI have twice now ann'ed that $4 million will be banked and to date it still hasn't been (and that is for 300 million ESI shares and 300 mill ESIO options) - how will they ever get $100 mill funding (without further SH devaluation) that A so proudly stated was written into the ann?

The interesting thing for mine, is that the ESI faithful here are using the argument against holding MNM as the same arguement for holding ESI!!! That is, if Exergen walk away from the pre-JV with MNM in BM - MNM is valued at nothing - we now know that wont happen...but in the same breath you use the pre-MOU with GEAC as the key to holding ESI! Let's hope AGL come through for ESI on that front.

F - you will find that the shares that Monash will recieve are not escrowed, but the options are. They could sell the shares from day one, but have to hold the ESIO until conversion date.

CM - "MUCH bigger funding being negotiated indicated by management"...I think you will find the ann indicates $4 mill is part of a larger transaction...there is nothing from ESI stating more funds are coming or this larger transaction is going all to ESI.

Cheers K