Gee you have a lot to say in this post PEG....lol Now your still...

Gee you have a lot to say in this post PEG....lol Now your still asking questions

"Who knows but ANS has nothing to do with this outcome"Really?? Well it is certainly interesting to look back and revisit the ANS involvement in these dealings!! (I know everyone knows the story well, but worth a quick summary)SDL had failed for years in confirming any backers of substance so a new entity (WAPRC) suddenly appeared promising to inject some capital and deliver these elusive corporate backers.When the ANS / WAPRC / SDL deal was announced it certainly seemed all pie in the sky and unlikely. The $100m which was dangled just didn't seem to make sense and the Cameroon Government wanted proof of much more substantial backing.I commented a couple of times that the whole deal appeared to be solely about gaining control. (of both ANS & SDL, presumably there was a strategy in using these entities which was part of the mystery!?)Of course WAPRC eventually went the way of the DoDo and a Company (Midwest) with closer direct ties to ANS stepped in.ANS became central to negotiations in regard the MBalam convention while also funding SDL working capital along the way.The pesky $100m was however still causing a problem, so eventually SDL called it and cancelled the agreement.Now, logic would then suggest that the Cameroon Government may have decided that SDL (having failed for so long) had just cancelled any hope of a renewal and were open to all offers!Congo would presumably have had similar thoughts and cancelled SDL licenses on the basis nothing was going to happen. I guess they will have to argue the case that they had Just cause to cancel or perhaps there will be some compensation payable (doubt if it will be too large)The Chinese consortium were apparently still interested in the project and lo and behold ANS appears to have put their hand up to continue the good work they were doing with SDL and the African Governments. (and the $100m is still on the cards)Therefore it appears to me that ANS are up to their eyeballs in what has gone on here and will be integral to any outcome with the Republic of Congo!Perhaps the ongoing investment in SDL was worthwhile as a bob each way in case this all takes another turn or perhaps the overall strategy always had a couple of possible outcomes including with SDL.SDL would appear to have been remiss(!) in handing over much of the negotiations to ANS and to all intents and purposes became obsolete (at least for now)The question of course is, will any benefits flow through to ANS retail shareholders. ANS on its own has very limited capital and involvement in such a capital intensive Rail / Port project can be problematic. Of course any chance of direct involvement may see sp spike on a relisting, so that would be a plus but could be a way off yet.It appears a long game has been played here but these are just my random thoughts and opinions only and the truth may be far more convoluted.(Does look like the makings of an interesting book though........................)