Define successful. They've certainly shipped a lot of high quality iron ore to China and paid a fair bit in royalties I guess. But that's a bit like saying SWM has been successful at showing a lot of programs or SXL has had some good radio. So what? They've both been terrible for shareholders.
But there are a whole bunch of companies on the ASX that have added value for shareholders over time through dividends and share price growth. I'd prefer MGX focus more on being one of those than anything else.
I'm sure you can see the current cash balance and potential cashflows over the next few years so why isn't this value being reflected in the MGX share price? Instead of it reflecting a premium to these cashflows it's actually reflecting a discount. Maybe that's due to a combination of their (not so successful) track record of delivering value for shareholders and the possibility that they'll be more concerned with being successful at shipping ore (I.e. overspending on new assets to keep the whole show rolling) than actually lifting the share price or returning cash to shareholders.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)