sentia,Yes, transport is always an issue, so is shipping, port...

sentia,
Yes, transport is always an issue, so is shipping, port facilities, etc
There are hundreds of companies that have very valuable resources which they mine profitably which are distant from a port. One of the keys to success is the size of the resource.
:-)
Size does matter.
And as the Ocean Equities reports point out, the one's with the nose in front are those that have quantity, quality and access to infrastructure eg, their comments about the 100mt of resource UMC has. As knowledge of the size of the resource, the transport, the port and the off take agreements become clearer so does the increase in the market cap'.
MXR's size of resource.....?..If it's 1700m tonne, the extra 14mt plus (?) Maximus identifies can be thrown in free to cover the transport differential to link into the new rail planned to the Midwest coast. Or if the conceptual and feasibility studies show better returns (than 26c a tonne) to shareholder value through mining the magnetite, that might be the way to go.
If the resource when JORC'd is a lot more than 1700m t, the economies of scale could attract a premium higher than 26c a tonne.
The value of iron ore is also forecast to continue to increase :-)
There's plenty of other juniors planning to rail to the coast, I think they'd all be happy to have another partner to share the cost.
There'd probably be no mining in the Pilbara, central Qld and the midwest if transport infrastructure was insurmountable.