paterson's defence of trivett valuation

Thank you for your email of 7th May 2012.
Patersons would like to assure you that our analysts are independent and objective when researching and reviewing the companies that they cover. The analysis of their investment recommendations form a reasonable basis for their research and the investment recommendations they make. Most importantly, their research reflects their view of the researched company ensuring that their research is indeed independent.
Our research is for the benefit of Patersons clients who value the independence of our highly regarded research analysts.
Patersons is confident that Mr Trivett’s research is independent and an accurate reflection of his view and opinion.

Kind regards
____________________________________________

My thoughts on the above:

It is not really a proper response to the reason they valued Mehdiabad, a binary play, at zero, but subsequent events (the company giving away the Mehdiabad upside through dilution), has proved Trivett right. I am sorry Mr Trivett I was wrong to criticise your valuation.

The lesson for me is never be fooled by a company's "it can come back on the balance sheet later" appeasement when they write off an asset: it is too late to criticise them when the loss is crystallised (i.e. as by dilution forthcoming dilution) as the directors can say they are giving away nothing because it was already written off. It is a way for directors to play fast and loose with shareholder wealth (possibly due to the shareholder base having changed in the intervening period?), so as far as I am concerned the replacement asset for Mehdiabad, Wonarah, needs to confer upon us the ability to make supernormal profits (e.g. as might be the case if we became phosphate king of the world) otherwise it is a poor substitute, IMV.