chairman, page-12

They're in a growth phase. It beggars belief that to make a point one would try to compare the current business of MCA with the current business of TGR. It's like comparing the strength of a five-year-old with that of a 20-year-old and deciding to euthanise the child because it doesn't rate. Go and dig up the performance of Tassal 5yrs after they were listed (in their own growth phase) and compare that to MCA. At least then you'll be comparing and apple with an orange instead of an apple with a pencil sharpener.

The market has told MCA that they want bigger fish which obviously means growing them out for much longer than their original business model had anticipated. To be able to meet consistent marketable product year on year they need to build more ponds.

I'm not sure why you think anybody is invested in MCA for the dividend. They don't pay one, and won't be paying one for years and years. They are a growth company. For those of us who got in at 6c and were able to 6-bag some of their holding at 43c any debate about a 1c dividend seems pretty trivial.

Aquaculture is a tricky business, lots can go wrong and in MCA's case they will need external investment while they continue to expand the business to the point where they can guarantee a consistent annual output of any magnitude. Of course they are still a risk until they reach maturity, but at 17c I'm happy to hold the one-third of my holding I have left with an eye to 2030 and their anticipated run rate of 10,000tpa.