Wrong Zeddzz!You are misrepesenting the situation regarding MPS...

Wrong Zeddzz!

You are misrepesenting the situation regarding MPS and myself.

Let's be fair here and consider what has really happened.

Firstly you were misleading with the cobalt recovery issue (ie when cobalt assays were being revised recently) without a retraction, and grossly innacurate with your production pipe model which you also never bothered to re-assess. Your timetable for a jorc which extended past this year was also way out recently, although earlier calls last year on a delayed jorc were correct. I mention these matters as we have around 450 new shareholders on the register post the resource upgrade, and any new members reading the forum need to be able to assess factual information.

The MPS report supporting the $25 price target was never publicly available to my knowledge, and I certainly never saw it. It was mentioned about the time of the price spike to $10.

I did see a subsequent report in about April of 2008 (from memory) which nominated a Global Resource of just over 100 mill tonnes at around 1.5% Cu equiv (from memory).

It was a very comprehensive document and I strenuously called for critical discussion of it on the forum, especially by you, as I wanted to hear about the 'real' negatives as much as anyone - and even mentioned as such.

But my calls were ignored .... No-one was ever able to factually and constructively pull the MPS report apart. Interestingly however, the sort of innuendo and substanceless posting we saw back then is even more prevalent now.

While the jorc has been a disappointment in terms of the 'theoretical grade' of the 10 year resource for initial mining compared to market expectations, we have been credited with 1 million tons of copper in the ground, a large part of it in the measured and indicated category.

That 'incidental' fact delivered by indepandant competant persons, appears to have been forgotten in the desperate attempts to berate the company.

Given the carnage that has taken place in the market, with an over reaction possibly making CDU very cheap based on its approved resource and likely cash flows, maybe a report based on the 'known knowns' by MPS actually deserves critical discussion rather than constant attempts to denigrate it without referring to its contents.

To my mind, 30 mt @ 1.24% Cu equiv still leads to share prices well in excess of where we are now, and there is a very good chance that the company and the likes of MPS are right in saying that the resource statement underscores what is available up at Rocklands. If proved to be true by the actual mining head grades achieved, then we could look forward to further upside as well.

I trust that I have clarified matters somewhat.

Cheers
Nev