AlbertE,Actually I stand by my comments fully. I posted quite a...

AlbertE,

Actually I stand by my comments fully. I posted quite a long note on the QR on 31 Jan, but will extract the relevant bits here. But before the criticism is made I will emphasise that imo either sustaining capex must be considered. Then you really should also prorata in some of the company's general costs as well. Cash cost is not enough to tell the story.

".....Hedging. MCR had quite a benefit for the quarter, as a result realising about A$1.80/lb payable above the spot on 4.03mmlb payable. They will get about half that benefit in the Mar Q, and pretty well none beyond June. That hedging has equated to most (say $7mm) of their $9.4 mm Cash+R build for the Q. That is without eating the hedge book (which could instead have been sold) they are treading water cash wise.

Nth Kambalda. These operations are not that bad. Cash cost of A$4.69 /lb is only 45cents higher than IGO's. Even after including mine capex expense (which I assume it was pretty much just sustaining capex) these mines made a surplus of $12.1mm.

Even without the hedging (on a prorata basis) this would have been about $7.3mm, still more than covering cash outgoings of about $5mm for the Q, not accounted for under mine expenses.

Sth Kambalda. Cash cost of A$6.14 is high, and when adding $2.74/lb of capex for $8.90/lb payable these mines are pretty worthless in the current climate with a nickel price of about $8.75 for the quarter..... "