Ann: Fenix Board Appointment, page-205

Mal,
The iron ore industry, universally and consistently, measures itself on C1 cash costs. Fenix and/or Welborn did not invent this industry metric. For Fenix to report on the benchmark industry standard, and to use this as a relevant measure of performance on cost reporting, is normal. You are trying to imply with your post and font that this is some sort of rank manipulation or fraud. Shame on you.
You can use whatever font you like (and well done - a good tactic from you the great propogandist) but the fact remains that C1 cash costs are a relevant metric for an iron ore miner to use for disclosure purposes.
C1 cash costs, as a relevant metric, should not be confused - or compared - to P&L numbers like EBIT or NPAT. To do so is manipulative.
Mr Poshman should be the first to acknowledge that there is a HUGE difference between C1 metrics (as defined by industry standards) and the P & L numbers he is using for his analysis on the net benefits of the FN deal or the real underlying performance on the business.
To identify a difference between the C1 numbers and the NPAT and EBIT numbers to support a general accusation of management incomitance or deception is, to quote one of your favorite words, LAUGHABLE. On the basis of this accusation FMG, BHP, RIO , and the entire mining world could join the lynching mob's target list.
Of course there is a difference between C1 cash costs and EBIT. They are completely different measurements.
Good luck
J9