Ann: CEO's AGM Presentation to Shareholders, page-20

"For a profitable mine you need the geology (which Rex has) and the Finance and ability to develop, which Rex is clearly lacking."

Being one of those who are still "anchored" (to Rex) these comments worry me. Coming from an industry insider I wonder if many comments on this forum (including mine) have been influenced by "anchorage" and aided and abetted by a vision somewhat blurred by rose colored spectacles?

If we9smia reads this he might comment on a recent announcement from Nevada Copper "New US copper mine opens for first time in a decade". The Pumpkin Hollow mine seems to be similar in characteristics to Hillside in that it has both underground and open cut potential. There seems similar reserves, at least in CuEq, even for the underground mine which has started production.

Of more interest is the Pumpkin Hollow open cut proposal which is of similar size to Hillside and is deemed both feasible and has "potential" financing through partnering with the KfW IPEX bank.

I note that the feasibility is based on a 0.5% CuEq over the life of the open cut mine
- is not Hillside open cut, without Fe, still around 0.8% CuEq?

Pumpkin Hollow has an Initial Capital Cost of $US672M
- Hillside ICC is US$360M.

Pumpkin Hollow has a C1 cost of US$1.73
- Hillside's C1 cost is US$1.61

The above cost figures may need comment from someone with some expertise but to an ordinary punter it would seem that Hillside prospects significantly outshine Pumpkin Hollow's. All we need is a PEPR!

Also of interest was the Nevada Copper announcement page heading "TRACK RECORD OF DELIVERING ON SCHEDULE"
- perhaps a sentiment that "anchored on" Rex shareholders who seem to be being kept in the dark on reasons for PEPR delays might look forward to from Rex board and management?
- I live in hope.