If I was in charge of BCI

Just standing on the sideline here and thought I might add in my 2c worth.

First of all, my sympathy to the loyal LT holders who have watched their investment just evapourate these past few months.

From the beginning, we were told that BCI was a short-term (7years) mine with the potential to make exceptional profits for its SH's. Would it not have been great if they could have just left it like this?

No, they want to expand into Brazil and then IOH - even the $190M deal buying back 25% from FMG (which I liked at the time) looks like a bad move - with the wisdom of hindsight.....

Like I have said before, I think BCI shareholders should have been given the "choice" - if they want to invest in Cleveland or IOH . All they had to do was to sell some BCI and buy CDG or IOH, that way those that wanted a "Pure BCI" could just continue.

Now BCI as a company is facing a huge challenge and I think the best way to weather the storm would be to mothball the whole operation until the IO price improves. (3-5 years?) Sure, this would not be good for the hardworking miners who have got BCI to where it is but perhaps a 3-month golden handshake now is better than being fired in a year's time when BCI can't continue anyway?

IF BCI was mothballed, SH's could still get a small dividend from the interest earned from the cash in bank and the balance of the 7-year mine life would still be there when the IO price improves!

I know there are probably contracts and all sorts of other problems that would make my suggestion unworkable - this posting is just food for thought and discussion )