@Xagxau supportive points politely made. It's also my opinion...

@Xagxau supportive points politely made. It's also my opinion the NEO investment was an attempt to lock in some off-take and vertical integration with NEO, who are leaders in the west's REO-Mangnet supply chain bottleneck. I gave you a thumbs up for reminding us Molycorp overpaid to buy Neo in 2012 with borrowed money, which helped send them bankrupt 3 years later... Comedy gold

So Molycorp is IPO out of bankruptcy as Neo Performance Materials end 2017, HAS buys 20% of Neo for $150M debt due in three years time, what could go wrong . I'm not saying history will repeat, but to support HAS (a non-cash generating business for at least 3 years) decision to buy Neo (for C$15/share, was as low as $9 just before Christmas) with 3 year debt that will capitalise into a ~$210M balloon repayment by pointing out the last company to try this trick went bankrupt 3 years later... well, if I didn;t laugh I'd cry.


"It reminds me to PLS being the first in the race, then took over Altura for a song"... you follow up with more hilarity, pointing out debt laden, high-cost developers who experience commissioning difficulties go broke if commodity prices fall I try to spice up my posts with a sense of humour but I'd never think of this angle, comedy genius.

Agree Neo is a valuable business in the right place and right time, don;t think it will be going broke. Who knows what the RE market and Neo share price will do over the next 2.5 years, but the risk to HAS is they 'may' need to reapy $210M in 2.5 years and will have to accept whatever the market is valuing Neo at the time. That risk is real, how much risk is subjective, the flip side as you say is Neo shares going to $30 and HAS doubles their money. Place your bets ladies and gentleman...