JT is on track with the value adding he spoke to me about in...

JT is on track with the value adding he spoke to me about in 2003.

At the bottom of my posts is a link to a September presentation by GIP which outlines revenue, production etc figures. They will change and if Talison somehow gets a near doubling in price for a new contract, they could change a lot.

With all manner of fancy numbers in reports, brokers seemed to have no problems early in the decade justifying prices of $10 and more per share for Talison (SGW). The broker reports weren't worth the paper they were written on (except for one which suggested selling) and SGW got into trouble in the first instance due to hidden hedging arrangements for its gold, not its tantalum.

GIP is not a one mine, one metal scenario, so even if we know all the details at every step for tantalum (remembering the tin and / or the feldspar may end up being worth more anyway, never mind the gold and stuff - all metals for which prices are easily obtainable), it will only be a bit of a guide to the next few decades of operation. Meanwhile, the currently-wetting-themselves-with-sheer-terror banks will get what they need to know to decide whether a line in the sand is in an attractive place or not when things settle (unless an industry player steps in first, of course). That BFS type stuff remains a bit meaningless to me (witness that we have companies around the world with little or no debt which are selling for less than cash backing, for example). I like a good EIS and local support (both of which GIP has), for without that, good numbers mean nothing. GIP has the lot as far as I'm concerned. LAF never had all the ducks lined up.