whats best for ext , page-14

A few thoughts, FWLTW...

Firstly, I think Peter Mc would have been wiser to appoint someone that could be seen as truly independent, rather than someone with such an obvious affinity with RIO.

I would be quite happy to do a deal with RIO in the end but it must be on the best possible terms. Will having one of their people on board help that? Surely it sends a negative sign to other potential bidders?

Are RIO allowed to accumulate a 40% stake? Under UK rules, when any shareholder reaches 30% they have to make a formal bid for the company.

My biggest concern is that all this infighting may be taking management's eye off the explo ball.

Personally, I would like a) Mark Hohnen to sit down with Dattels & co & ask 'em who's running the show at Kalahari. If they can't agree that he is, then he should step down and make it explicit who's in charge, rather than all this underhand nonsense. b) Once it's clear who's in charge at Kalahari then they need to be locked in a room with Peter Mc until they can agree the way forward. Get this nonsense out of the way and get on with the job, I say.

I do think Kalahari have a point that EXT has to be careful not to limit its negotiating options at this early stage. However, I also hate all the skullduggery and want true independence on the EXT Board to ensure that the company acts in the interests of all shareholders, not in favour of one party or the other, and to ensure that any allocation of shares, bonuses etc is entirely fair and reasonable.

Irrespective of all this, the shares remain cheap and once this is all done & dusted, and we have more progress on defining the resource, should be rated much more highly than they are now.

Regards,

Mark