As a reverse engineered organisation (being spun out of Iluka...

As a reverse engineered organisation (being spun out of Iluka versus created from scratch as a Royalty business), I can’t help but think management and the board also need considerable focus on their own educating. Especially since they acknowledge it is a new proposition in Australia.

Also did they grow the business over the last 12 months as they say? Isn’t the quantum of royalty streams as spun out?

And Is ‘organic growth’ really the right terminology or is it purely an escalation of royalty payments resulting from an escalation of mining the asset?

And wanting to be transparent shouldn’t they flag the recent higher than average/expected prices have been a significant kicker to returns and quantities mined (and transparency which would be equally helpful when they have to inform the opposite has occured).

And for reporting transparency (& as done by multi-faceted organisations) it would be appropriate to split contribution income and expenses to each attributable business element (e.g. 1) MAC – Income $140m & attributable Expenses +/-1%: 2) Current other Royalties Income & attributable Cost & 3) Sourcing new royalties attributable Costs v Income).
No one would say no to another MAC revenue stream, but not at any cost, at the top of the market & not if the costs and time of finding them are as if identifying the resource in the first place.

IMO Royalty stream entities Overseas are successful because they are more passive investments versus active, uniquely within the Resources sector filled with risk, and which disqualifies investment by many investors/groups/entities.