very pleased with this investment , page-5

Vanimo, I am struggling to understand as well, but for different reasons.

What I can't understand why MIN needed to shell out $200m in order to be "well positioned to be actively involved with the other Project stakeholders..."

Clearly, MIN won't end up with a controlling stake in AQA, meaning they risk ending up as little more than a minority shareholder in the whole gig.

And if AZJ and Baosteel ultimately end up winning control of AQA, then its possible they could use the listed vehicle as a fund-raising vehicle for the project, meaning MIN could end up being heavily diluted unless they follow their entitlements in the substantial capital raising exercises that would occur.

If MIN wanted a seat at the table to win work in building the project, all it needed to do was sharpen its pencil and tender its services as it boasts them, namely having "proven experience in successfully developing full turnkey mine site operations and mine-to-port supply chain solutions in the most time and cost effective manner."

If MIN are considered capable and competent by Baosteel and AZJ at being able to help build the project, then I'm sure AZJ and Boasteel would happily make use of MIN's services - whether or not MIN happened to have a stake in the project holding company.

But if AZJ and Boasteel seek to award the work to contractor(s) other than MIN, then there's very little that a 13% share in the business can do to change that decision.

It's like Orica buying a share in BHP and expecting to win contracts for the supply of explosives as a result.

It's all a bit bizarre to me, but then again I'd be happy to be enlightened as to what I'm missing in this unfolding game of gamesmanship