Thanks for raising that coal price issue - it obviously makes a...

Thanks for raising that coal price issue - it obviously makes a huge difference to the viability of the Nuurst project.

I was using the price of $60/t for thermal coal at the Chinese border from TVN's "Acquisition of Coal Project Mongolia" announcement on June 24. They also mention that seabourne thermal is $120/t.

I believe them because this article and this one put seabourne coal prices at around $130/t. Note that this is for 5,500 kilocalories/kilogram coal whereas Nuurst coal is 6,688 - which will bring a higher price.

Therefore the price of $60/t at the Chinese border is quite realistic and probably even conservative.

I'm not sure why your article suggests a value of $20/t. What calorific value is it? Is that the price at the mine site (like anything, it will be cheaper at the front gate than hundreds of miles away)?

I can't see why it was suggested that the coal quality is less than expected. They were anticipating thermal coal with a calorific value of between 6,200 and 6,800 kcal/kg and have ended up with 6,688 - towards the higher end of the range.

I personally don't think coal quality was the reason for the drop from 9c. I think it was a simple case of being due for a pull-back - compounded by global market conditions spooking people. I actually feel I'm lucky to get back in at these prices - I didn't think we'd see under 7c again.