maybe the gem of the year, page-20

bello

I have been following LNC for about 3 years now. If I had to choose between LNC and BLK, I would have to laugh and choose LNC. I will give you 5 reasons:

1) "scoping studies for the Scaddan Energy project have estimated 0.49 to 0.64 barrels of oil products for every wet tonne of lignite." LNC are getting between 1 to 1.5 barrel per tonne.

2) UCG does not have to dig up the coal, BLK plan to mine the lignite. Hence the environmental impact is less severe with UCG and I would imagine cheaper.

3) LNC has anything from 25+ billions of tonnes of coal in their asset portfolio, excluding those that are earmarked for disposal. Their Alaskan lease alone is 18 billion tonnes.

4) It is reasonable to expect that LNC will get AUD$1.5Billion for the disposal of their coal assets. This means no capital raising, no dilution, no partners, no debt.

5) LNC have projects in more than one location within Australia and overseas, mitigating the risk of any political interference.

I am fine having my finger in the BLK pie but LNC is in another class.