Yes, probably a good thing for HIG and it's holders, but there...

Yes, probably a good thing for HIG and it's holders, but there will be many disappointed PNA holders. Too cheap to handover like this...

Ok so how is it good for HIG? And how is it good for HIGs holders? (not necessarily the same question).

1. Demonstrates further corporate interest in Frieda - a project that is regaining momentum can be helpful to HIGs funding options

2. If it proceeds then GRAM replace PNA as the second largest holder (14%) on the HIG register - simplifying the takeover game and increasing interest in HIG as a takeover play. HIG might be less thrilled at this prospect but it does the holders no harm. In the meantime, a rising sp helps HIG with their funding options and the outlook for holders becomes less dilutive - something of a virtuous circle here.

3. One of the few favoured copper plays is removed from the ASX - who needs competition...

4. The takeover saga brings attention to the Frieda project in the retail market of punters like you and me. I am sure many PNA holders never heard of Frieda until the last year or so, and now it is popping up in the business pages from time to time, with the occasional nod to HIG.

5. Eighty percent (80%) of Frieda will be held by a partner with very deep pockets - funding becomes so much more certain. As good a partner as PNA may be, funding Frieda always carried a questionmark. That questionmark has just gone.

6. GRAM will bring Chinese economies to construction costs. If PNA were set to deliver a cheap project, a Chinese led project should be delivered even more cheaply.

There are probably a few more positives but are there any negatives?

I can only see one at present. The relationship between HIG and PNA was clearly "friendly" as shown in a very favourable Frieda deal. The relationship with GRAM is likely to be somewhat more neutral.

Any more positives? Any more negatives?