Thxz Ben, TTC and others who attended...Looking at the Q&A from...

Thxz Ben, TTC and others who attended...

Looking at the Q&A from the meet it appeared the Directors looked like they were being a bit too careful in their answers.

For example- I thought they had full ownership of the NMP and SPL tech yet what is with this first right of refusal answer continuously given. Nobody asked them to give further details into what does this all mean? For example if a year lapses and they do not develop the tech can they on sell it... or I gather they can never sell it, only develop it. I disliked some of the very brief answers to be perfectly honest. Yet I guess you had to be there to hear all that was said...

NMP & SPL is obviously not my first priority and a guess some of us are a little disheartened that the completion of plant 1 and OS expansion is to take longer than many of us anticipated... It seems to very much be a LT play now. Probably a huge growth. To hear of a Super charged turbo stategic viewpoint for OS growth would have been a lot more to my likely in the MT.

I guess we all get a little too optimistic sometimes. Yet it would be a brave person to take money out of such a hugely growing company and lose this opportunity. STers are out IMO.

We are still only pricing Plant 1 of 8.6M+ income at 60c IMO. And OS expansion at 55c. Which is way undervalued on a forward earning looking basis. I think the market will upgrade the Plant 1 by 50c odd when completed and money going into bank. Then OS expansion especially on any JV with majors.

How about Alcoa--- does anyone at the AGM feel they MAY have already stitched up a conditional deal with them? Based on the completion of the first Plant?

Also why is it that with such a potentially in demand product\service why do we need to pay for FE Studies? Surely it would be a lot faster and more cost effective to have the bigger AL Coy's do this in a JV deal straight away.

I guess ultimately for ST-MT gains I am saying shave a bit off LT profitability for the sake of getting the Plants up and running OS turbo charged style. As opposed for a small Coy like our needing to come up with 12 Mil here and there. When the big boys have very deep pockets.

Let us hope for an Alcoa deal that is very different to what was communicated...while 'Rome was not built in a day' we would prefer some help to have a good part of the global market in as little timeframe as possible.

Also not being able to modify existing Alcoa plants seemed to be communicated- is this true? As the cost of whole new plants are far greater than modifying existing ones.

Basically I guess I am trying to see an approach to turbo charge growth if possible to get great multi bagger investor returns year after year. No doubt I would guess most investors feel the same.

Why do they feel they need to build the Plants themselves? I guess they are looking not to give away much of their LT profits for super charged acceleration of profits.

I guess many of these are questions for Ben, yet feedback from attendees would be appreciated.

Plus personally if it is to bottom out at 1.1 i would not mind getting back the 40% i sold off on profit taking then regretted greatly when reached 1.5. I thought a 20c slump would happen today, yet STers are mostly gone. Was hoping for an accummulation then bottom draw it for 2011 as a raising sleeper to review weekly.

Yet I would like to get a few more questions answered before doing so.

Cheers

JAY