EQR tin Vs KIS, page-3

		Resource Size	Grade	Tungsten total	Production pa	Project Life	Pre tax IRR	Price Assumption	AUD	Opex/ mtu	Pre tax NPV	Capex	Payback period
1	KIS	4.43m t	0.92%	4.08m mtu	300k t pa ore	14 yrs	43%	US295	70c	$129.80	$A 241m	A129.2m	2.25 yrs
2	RFR	10.61m	0.17%	1.853m mtu	1.3m t pa ore	5yrs	163%	US 300	71c	US 115.63	$A40.3m	A 11.3m	5 mths
3	TGN (Mt Mulgine)	140m t	0.10%	460k mtu pa	6m t pa	23.5 yrs	10.83%	US300	70c	US 92	$A422m	A669m
4	EQR	47m t	0.12%	260k mtu pa	3m t pa	15 yrs +	60%	US 290	$1		$A161m	A53.8m	1.5yr

Plext

All have put out PFS of late with EQR expected in the next couple of months. EQR's figures are from their 2012 PFS. A couple of points to make.

EQR didn't have the quarry & head lease (value $15m to $25m). Quarry is a by product and will reduce costs. If we bring the currency inline with the others given the tungsten price is similar we get $230m NPV and a shorter payback & an increased IRR. Additionally, this doesn't include other deposits that could add 10 years plus - Iron Duke, Petersens and West Dyke (based on previous geologist comments). On top of this management are expected to reduce the capex (guesstimate sub $40m) by only mining the king veins.

Therefore based on current market caps of TGN $169m EQR $45.5m KIS $70m RFR $12.5m, we are well placed, given the above and we are actually producing tungsten and have cashflow. If the tungsten remains low, then the others are unlikely to fly apart from RFR as their actual base case is $US240mtu.