calling danash, page-14

Thanks Danash.

Regarding the DCF, makes sense that it is most sensitive to the near-term cash flows and also the assumptions. I guess my question was aimed at clarifying that you didn't continue the model into perpetuity at some constant growth rate or apply an EV/EBITDA multiple (or similar) in the final year. Given the nature of the project, assumed cash flows should just fall to zero from year 20 onwards (or maybe some small salvage value included - but this makes little difference). The assumptions around the exchange rate and price of coal are anyone's guess - yours is as good as any analyst (trust me).

Given this, I think for a company such as CPL a trading multiples based analysis is most useful. I think BND is a good comparable company. Have you thought about COK? I think ideally a peer group of about 5-6 companies at a similar stage (not yet producing) with a similar type of coal (thermal) should be found to calculate an average EV/Resource multiple. This can then be applied to CPL's resource to determine an appropriate trading EV. Given very rough back-of-the envelope calculations, I can't help but feel CPL is currently overvalued based on a simple EV/resource multiple (granted this is only using BND and COK). Hopefully you can prove me wrong as I'm a holder of the stock and a big believer in the story. With a bit more time I'll try to update my analysis and post more detailed results.