the ethics of a sewer rat, page-9

Mozart,

I don't know if you could stomach reading the Delloite Valuation Report, given all the sophistry and contortions
but it says in it that production is now expected in 2016. It keeps on stretching out...

Also Delloite's valuation of BRM on an EV/Tonne basis is 50c

They look at comparable transaction values as a reference point in the report (much higher on an EV/Tonne basis), then decide to ignore them. A lot of people and professional services firms are bending over backwards to assist WN. As I recall it cost 230-250K or so for Delloite to do this...they're pretty damn cheap at the price for what they've done hey?

And given that Wah Nam is only offering 1.50 + toilet paper, the EV/Tonne they are paying is 25c

From p. 117 of the bidder's statement: (my summary)

Ferraus EV/Tonne $1
Giralia EV/Tonne $2.7
Aurox. 0.7
United Minerals 2.1
Warwick 6.9

Delloite's rationalisation is a classic (in the loose sense of the word)

"We have therefore placed limited reliance on this cross-check."

------
We note the following in relation to the above:
? during 2010 and 2011 there were three takeover transactions involving development stage companies, which
achieved an average implied resource multiple of AUD 1.5/t. Two of these transactions consisted of the acquisition
of target companies with hematite assets. The average resource multiple for these two transactions was AUD 1.9/t
? many of the above transactions are likely to include some special value, due to the strategic intention of the bidder and potential strategic value associated with gaining control of the target and its assets, in particular infrastructure assets, such as a port allocation.

For example, it is likely that some level of special value existed for the purchaser in the Atlas transactions with
Giralia Resources Limited (Giralia) and FerrAus and the BHP transaction with United Minerals. As a result, the
resource multiples paid were higher than they would have been if special value had not existed.
Based on our analysis above, we note there are few comparable transactions against which to benchmark a suitable transaction resource multiple. We have therefore placed limited reliance on this cross-check.