I posted this over on STX board.
*******************
We all read the Hancock 3rd Supp Bidders Statement, in which Hancock asked questions regarding Strikes ability to fund, construct and complete the Haber fertiliser project.
Obviously this is a takeover battle, so each party uses any ammunition it can muster.
But it occurred to me, that Hancock group has and had, huge cattle and pastoral interests.
H had the Kidman cattle stations, which were one of the largest cattle accumulations in Aust.
H recently sold most of those properties.
Whilst H still has a few cattle stations, it appears that H are concentrating on the S. Kidman brands of beef product - ie up the value chain.
The point is, that H would very well understand the shortage of urea, fertiliser in Aust, would very well understand the need for Aust to produce fertilisers.
H would also be well aware of the value attached to a successful Haber Project. H would have used loads of fert on her properties.
H would have the financial resources to fund Haber, the connections and credibility to attract funders, and customers and equity partners.
So I can imagine that were H successful in acquiring a significant equity stake in WGO, that H would be very interested in talking to STX on participation in Haber.
maybe, even though H gave STX a "serve" on its ability to get Haber developed - in fact the Haber project may be one of the reasons H is interested in purchasing equity in WGO.
Later merge WGO with STX, or do a deal to supply WGO gas to Haber, in return for an interest in Haber?
Expand
