So hang on, we are supposed to be angry at our board for rebuffing poorly constructed and underpriced takeover offers just in case another predator comes in with a cheaper one, but one who evidently has a better strategy? Wow, just wow.
You points in some ways seem well made, however you are now actively bagging out the company whilst indicating TER is the be all and end all. Correct me if I'm wrong but Wal King is the non exec chairman and you have a different CEO? If so, then the CEO is the one that runs the business, the chair provides the overall strategy but delivering it is for the CEO, yet you bag him out and claim Tony Weber will run the show but then bag out UNV for a seemingly poor strategy (that you don't seem to understand). You can't have it both ways.
Selling domestically for a much lower risk is absolutely a good strategy, we have been shielded from declines in the seaborne coal market but retain some upside to it with the lower volumes sold internationally. You seem to think its all price driven when margin is the main impact and I've shown you previously the cash margins of the UNV assets versus BA are not too dissimilar. Being as UNV report the "hedged" price within their segmental reporting (as it relates to the price they are paid) and I suspect TER include that in the corporate segment (if TER hedge, I had not noticed comments on hedging before) then the margins will probably more closely align.
Whilst price may well increase for seaborne coal, so does risk and so do operational costs as the cost of transport etc export tariffs etc increase along with it. Its not a clear definitive that one strategy works and the other doesn't. Theres more than 1 way to skin a cat as they say.
UNV Price at posting:
24.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
