You watch those eyes old man! I understand your frustration, but...

You watch those eyes old man!

I understand your frustration, but to this point they couldn't commit to any of the projects you mentioned because of the political climate. That doesn't mean they're abandoning it, as they've said all along they will proceed once a satisfactory environment exists. MEL don't see ELK as their future, they know what it is and the limitations it presents. My greatest criticism of the board over the years was precisely that they had failed to diversify the risk, and now at least they're trying. I can't accept that they haven't done due diligence on the project, I choose to believe it was extensive - but perhaps that is my naivety.

For a long time I think shareholders have been way too harsh on Hendersen and the board given the outrageous conditions they've had to work under. I've had my criticisms, but I continue to believe that aside from diversifying the asset base (which has proven to be critical), there is little they could have done to protect the share price. They have a right to operate under fair and transparent conditions, and had they existed we would be lauding their efforts and enjoying the spoils. Instead, we have this...

Anyway, I'm covering old ground. This discussion has been had plenty of times before, put my engagement in this thread down to catharsis.