feasibility study, page-7

SW I dont think we will be seeing this getting done by all equity.

The PFS flags the potential for economic returns to be derived by way of third party tolling on the port and road solution. I think this is why there was a lot of talk of infrastructure type players being interested in the project. Being a toller all you do is take a clip on the way out with no exposure to the IO price. Clearly this is why a 20mtpa operation is being talked about, with Bucklands contributing 8 mpta of that. Having this type of non-IO price linked income makes the project much more bankable than a straight out IO play. I would think IOH will retain a portion of the Port/Road in light of the large cash balance and income from IV and this will also give more solidity to IOH's revenue base.

We know with Aurizon's recent foray into the Pilbara there is a demand for third party infrastructure solutions.

As we know IOH's business model is the free carry model where a partner funds development a la the Iron Valley deal. In the past they have flagged breaking up the project so that you have a port/road partner and a potential MinRes type deal on the actual Bucklands mine where the partner develops the mine for a royalty cut to IOH. A deal of this type should allow IOH to keep their capital for the port/road solution.