great announcement, page-77

Again you deliberately disinform.

> You have to agree it is a fair point though

Steady on. Make your point first.

> why would a consortium member spend 50-100m in Capex on rail/trucking/benefication

ATEC's rail project is multi-use and part of a plan to build a national rail network.

Trucking by a trucking company is not capex, as the trucks already exist. It's opex

> to earn a monthly income from a company (who supposedly will make the lions-share of profit) now worth 50-60m?

The profit is after operating costs, which include the transportation costs. MAK own the deposit 100%.

> IF they had that money, and believed that strongly in the project, why not buy a big chunk of the firm? Or offer to do it but get a big bunch of shares too?

If they attempted to buy a large chunk on the open market at present, it would send the s/p to a long way above its level last year. This wouldn't mean that some capital could be raised from these partners, however if I were one of the freight co's I'd probably want to hedge my risk.

This does raise the interesting point that, as there are several interested co's who would stand to profit from providing services to MAK, it would be to their advantage if they could supply some up front capital costs by way of a loan or equity.