CSM - Consolidated Minerals

A graph comparing CSM shareprice and the value of manganese over the past two years or so can be found at
http://www.usail2.com/consolidated_takeover.htm
Makes interesting viewing and would in itself suggest anything less than $4/share undervalues the company.
Another interesting point is to look closely at the jump in manganese price since late April and compare that to when CSM finally disclosed that the manganese price had gone up, on June 25. Given we're in the middle of a takeover, wouldn't that be considered an important omission by the company? Not in keeping with their fiduciary duties? I would have thought so! These guys should be hanging from the highest tree, given the crime (theft from mum and dad shareholders) they're trying to commit here.

Letter to shareholders from Vote NO

CONSOLIDATED MINERALS TAKEOVER VOTE NO
Dear Consolidated Minerals Shareholder,
We write to you as fellow CSM shareholders, concerned that we are being encouraged to sell our shares via the Pallinghurst Scheme of Arrangement at below market price and well below what we feel is their true value. We are actively campaigning against this inadequate proposal which will benefit management and the board, to the detriment of the existing shareholders. As fellow shareholders, we ask for your support by voting NO to the proposal.
WHY YOU SHOULD VOTE NO TO THE PALLINGHURST SCHEME OF ARRANGEMENT
We strongly believe that the proposal consisting of $1.68cash/share plus 2 ‘new’ shares for 5 existing shares is grossly inadequate and significantly undervalues the company. The price offered is NOT fair and is NOT reasonable. The offer is also confusing. Simply put, Pallinghurst Resources is offering to buy three of every five shares you own for just $2.80, well below their current market price. At the closing price of $3.12, shareholders will lose 0.32c/share on three of every five shares. NewConsMin would need to trade at $3.60 for us to break even. Brian Gilbertson meanwhile would have made $109 million.
Manganese ore is currently fetching record prices (US$7.40/dmtu CIF China). This is not just a short term increase as management imply. At the recent Manganese Institute Conference in Vienna, they indicated rising long term consumption and prices for high grade manganese ore.
Management is not working in our best interests. They have been seen by external parties to mislead investors on the implications of manganese pricing, as shown by this quote from a reputable commodity ‘news and prices’ journal: ”In the midst of a takeover battle, CSM advised shareholders of higher manganese ore prices, but was very conservative on the financial implications of the higher prices.”
The bottom line is that manganese prices for the next quarter have increased by 140%. If CSM achieves those September quarter prices for the whole of FY08, the manganese division will add over $200m in revenue. Even after tax, the manganese revenue that is ‘locked in’ for the upcoming quarter alone will be similar to if not more than what CSM will earn during the whole 2006/07 financial year (projected A$33.8M). A ‘yes’ vote would see you forfeit 60% or more of that.
CSM has a valuable asset in the largest independent high grade manganese ore deposit close to China. The reputable commodity ‘news and prices’ journal believes that “As the world’s last and largest independent manganese miner with a high-grade deposit, CSM is considered a prize.” Management wants you to give away 60% at a discounted price!
CSM has the only chrome ore deposit in Australia. Chromite prices have increased, and the outlook for this commodity from Chinese stainless steel companies is bullish.
Nickel output should increase substantially in the coming year with the commencement of the mine development drives in the Kambalda Dome and production recently commencing at Widgiemooltha. Management recently highlighted CSM’s “significant nickel growth platform” with “significant upside potential” and is targeting 15,000 tonnes per annum output in the near future (RIU conference presentation, May 9, 2007).
Further significant, high-grade nickel intersections obtained at the Gillet Prospect, part of CSM’s Widgiemooltha nickel, confirming that Gillet is emerging as a significant new nickel discovery and highlighting the upside to CSM’s nickel exploration portfolio.
Nickel is now unhedged, maximising exposure to the current high spot prices.
CSM owns $213 million (94 cents per CSM share) worth of shares in other ASX-listed companies (based on closing prices as of 9/7/07). These include JML, VML, BCI, MTH and RDR. Their market capitalisation has increased by more than the additional 0.30c/share offered by Pallinghurst Resources since the original announcement on the 23/02/07.
An alternative, superior offer by Territory Resources (ASX: TTY) is likely, subject to completion of limited due diligence. This alternative proposal is for $2/share and one TTY share per CSM share (nominally worth $3.20 at closing on 9/7/07), or 3 TTY shares/CSM share (nominally worth $3.60 at closing on 9/7/07), superior to the Pallinghurst offer (nominally worth $2.92 at closing on 9/7/07).
YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT – IF YOU VOTE “YES” (which we DO NOT recommend),
1) We, the current shareholders would lose control of Consolidated Minerals forever (Pallinghurst will own 60%) AND lose money in the process.
2) We will receive considerably less money for our shares than they are currently worth.
3) We will forfeit 60% of the immediate and ongoing benefit of record manganese and chrome ore prices and future increased nickel output and revenue.
4) We immediately forfeit 56 cents/CSM share, being 60% of the 94 cents/share CSM currently owns in other companies.
5) Going forward you will be further diluted by the NewConsMin strategy which will require the issuing of further shares to fund other purchases.
6) There is no assurance that the existing 50% payout dividend policy will be maintained.
YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT – VOTE NO FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS
1) Vote NO so we, the current shareholders will retain control of Consolidated Minerals.
2) Vote NO so we will receive all of the markedly increased profits currently coming CSM’s way, where profit after tax in the coming quarter alone is set to comfortably surpass the entire 06/07 annual profit.
3) Vote NO, so we will retain 100% of the immediate and future benefit of record manganese and chrome ore prices and future increased nickel output and revenue.
4) Vote NO, so we retain 100% of the shares CSM currently owns in other companies.
5) Vote NO, so the possibility of a bidding war for CSM between Territory Resources, Pallinghurst and any other interested parties is retained.
6) Vote NO, so that 50% of profits to be paid as dividends will be maintained.
7) Vote NO, as the price offered is NOT fair and is NOT reasonable.

CONSMIN MANAGEMENT HAVE WITHHELD MARKET SENSITIVE INFORMATION
We believe that management have taken advantage of shareholders at a time when the share price was low. ConsMin management have been fumbling along, at best a lacklustre performance with little vision. They have now decided to engage Pallinghurst Resources to replace their own short-sightedness’ and at our expense. Do not accept this!
For more information, including our estimated financial projection for the upcoming quarter and year, please visit our dedicated website, www.usail2.com/consolidated_takeover.htm

Yours Sincerely

Glenn Stedman & Dr Keith Barnard
Consolidated Minerals Takeover Vote NO
gsmarine@yahoo.com kbarnard@iinet.net.au

kooka873 said:

A pity Michael Kiernan got too greedy with his proposed increase in pay towards the end of this term as MD with CSM. Had he been a little less greedy or waited a while whilst CSM grew in capital value perhaps shareholders would have been more at ease with his desired increased pay AND we wouldn't find ourselves in this situation - but that's the past.

Click to expand...

You can look at this another way... had CSM paid him the pay increase sought he would have stayed, the company would have been doing well atm (we can speculate it would have done better than what it is doing now led by the current directors), and you wouldn't have to replace the current directors!

I think he has now showed why he deserved the increase.

War of words over ConsMin bid heats up
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,22051356-5005200,00.html
July 10, 2007

HAS anyone else got a copy of the letter addressed to Consolidated Minerals shareholders from those responsible for the Takeover Vote No campaign?
It makes for very interesting reading and the two shareholders who penned the letter, Glenn Stedman and Dr Keith Barnard, lay out why they believe rejecting a Pallinghurst-led bid for 60 per cent of the company is in the best interest of the company.

The letter, which has just started to appear on trading chat rooms, suggests that shareholders will be the losers should the Pallinghurst bid gets up.

Now everyone would be aware that Michael Kiernan, through Territory Resources, has been granted limited access to the ConsMin books for a possible rival bid to that of Pallinghurst's.

Expect Kiernan and co. to come up with a bid in the lead-up to the July 19 shareholder vote on the Pallinghurst scheme of arrangement.

But the way it looks to the untrained eye at the moment, neither Pallinghurst will get the required 75 per cent approval and Territory will also fall short of the 90 per cent acceptance rate it will probably ask for.

So where does that leave shareholders and the ConsMin board which has so publicly backed the Pallinghurst arrangement for shareholders to get $1.68 a share in cash and 40 per cent in a new company dubbed NewCSM?

And this is the nub of where Stedman and Barnard are coming from.

"We are actively campaigning against this inadequate proposal which will benefit management and the board to the detriment of the existing shareholders," they wrote.

"The proposal ... is grossly inadequate and significantly undervalues the company. The offer is also confusing."

Daily Assay is not sure about just how the ConsMin board will view the letter, especially the parts which argue that the board played down aspects of the global price rise for manganese, ConsMin's chief output.

"At the recent Manganese Institute Conference in Vienna, they indicated rising long-term consumption and prices for high-grade manganese ore," the pair wrote.

"CSM has a valuable asset in the largest independent high-grade manganese ore deposit close to China. Management wants you to give away 60 per cent at a discounted price."

The dissenting shareholders also argue that ConsMin owns a portfolio of interests in other mining-related stocks which is worth $213 million, or about 94 cents per ConsMin share.

"An alternative, superior offer by Territory Resources is likely. We believe that management has taken advantage of shareholders ata time when the share price was low. ConsMin management has been fumbling along, at best a lacklustre performance with little vision.

"They have now decided to engage Pallinghurst Resources to replace their own short-sightedness and at our expense.

"Do not accept this!"

Pretty strong words indeed and the basis for a mounting campaign against Pallinghurst which also includes a Vote No website.

But don't expect Pallinghurst to lie down.

It has already lifted the cash component of its bid once, partly because of the rising manganese prices and partly because of shareholder dissent, but expect them to throw in another sweetener sometime soon.

I still think that this TTY bid is very wobbly. It is the stock of Territory that pays no dividend and whose market capitalization puts it down as a mining minnow, that is the weak point. It really needs an all cash bid or dare I say it, a mix of cash and newconsmin shares, but then the bid would need investment backers on some stance.

FROM: Steven1234

You can look at this another way... had CSM paid him the pay increase sought he would have stayed, the company would have been doing well atm (we can speculate it would have done better than what it is doing now led by the current directors), and you wouldn't have to replace the current directors!

I think he has now showed why he deserved the increase.

Hi Steven,

There's no doubting the abilities of Michael & I personally was very disappointed to see him leave CSM - even more so at seeing the results of the current board of management of CSM.....and at what they've done to CSM...................

Kooka

Kiernan tells it like it is

July 12, 2007

DAILY Assay has said it before and we will say it again: Michael Kiernan is one of the straightest-shooters going around in the resources game at the moment.
The former truckie tells it like it is.

It makes for a breath of fresh air not just for journalists, but also for shareholders and analysts and anyone else who crosses the Kiernan path.

Because effectively what all those mentioned above are trying to do is exactly what he himself, as a miner, wants to do.

That is scratch around in the dirt and try to come up with something of value.

So it comes as no surprise that Kiernan would put out a letter to his "fellow" Consolidated Minerals shareholders as D Day approaches for his new vehicle, Territory Resources, to lead a consortium to put in a rival bid for ConsMin to that of Pallinghurst's.

I hope Kiernan paid someone a decent amount to draft the letter, because Daily Assay will give you what would have been his own version.

What appeared in the letter: "I would like to introduce myself (or re-introduce myself, as the case may be). My name is Michael Kiernan and I am the executive chairman of Territory Resources, an Australian resources group."

What would have appeared in the original draft: "G'day, Kiernan here. Remember me? If you don't, you can call me boss of Territory Resources. "

Letter: "Over eight years, I had the pleasure of serving shareholders as the managing director of Consolidated Minerals. After bringing ConsMin out of administration, I led the team that, together with Hong Kong's Noble Group and Austria's CDM DECOmetal, grew ConsMin into a near $1 billion company."

Original draft: "I hope you haven't forgotten that with my mates, I built what was a bastard of a company into a billion dollar company before the chairman shafted me."

Letter: "Territory has approached the ConsMin board with an alternative proposal to the Pallinghurst offer, which has been recommended by your board. I believe the Territory proposal would be superior to Pallinghurst's offer."

Original draft: "I'm back baby. I've got bigger balls than Pallinghurst and I'm going to give you more bang for your ConsMin buck with my rival offer. "

Letter: "We requested the ConsMin board allow Territory to conduct limited due diligence so that Territory could evaluate whether or not to make an alternative offer. To my surprise, the ConsMin board initially resisted providing Territory with that access. Last Thursday, they reluctantly agreed to provide due diligence access only until this Friday, 13 July."

Original draft: "Did you see how the ConsMin board wouldn't let us do due diligence? I'm sure you have got a good idea of what I want to do with them when I get my company back. They tried to put the squeeze on me by giving me only a short time to do due diligence when I (with the help of shareholders of course) forced them to let me in the door to see just what they've been up to with the accounts since I left. "

Letter: "However what I think isn't important. What is important is which alternative you think will provide you with the greatest value for your ConsMin shares. To make that decision, you need to be able to consider each proposal on its own merits. For that reason, it is imperative that the ConsMin board delays the Scheme Meeting scheduled for 19 July, at which you will be asked to decide on Pallinghurst's offer. "

Original draft: "You all know I'm the man that's going to save you. But if I'm going to lead, you are going to have to back me up. Get a hold of ConsMin and tell them, scratch that, DEMAND TO THEM, that they delay the vote on the Pallinghurst proposal which we all know (insert chuckle sound) has not a hope in hell of getting up."

Letter: "I encourage you to contact the ConsMin board and demand that the Pallinghurst Scheme Meeting be delayed, so that you can have the opportunity to assess which proposal - Territory or Pallinghurst - is superior."

Original draft: "Oi. What are you still doing. Get onto ConsMin, the number is 08 9321 3633 and get up 'em! You want more money, don't ya?"

Letter: "Yours sincerely, Michael Kiernan."

Original draft: "You know you love me, Michael Kiernan."

Just joking Michael.

LOL I wonder whether he is mates with Wayne Mcrae nice to have a bit of humour every now and then!

Tony.

Territory races the ConsMin clock
Kevin Andrusiak
July 13, 2007

TERRITORY Resources chairman Michael Kiernan has again demanded that Consolidated Minerals delay a vote on a Pallinghurst Resources-led bid for the carbon steels miner as he once more accused the ConsMin board of a dirty tricks campaign.
With only hours to go before Territory's bankers and legal hands are shut out of access to ConsMin's accounts as part of a limited due diligence period, Mr Kiernan has set Monday as the deadline for Territory to table a formal offer - expected to value ConsMin around $730 million.

However, ConsMin shareholders are set to vote on Thursday on Pallinghurst's share-and-scrip offer, which has been actively endorsed by the ConsMin board and values the Perth-based miner at around $665 million.

Pallinghurst, which is chaired by former BHP Billiton boss Brian Gilbertson, wants 60 per cent of the company, with current shareholders to retain the rest.

The company would then be renamed NewCSM and have other mining assets rolled into it.

The Pallinghurst deal has failed to gain much traction with local shareholders, who have rallied against the deal.

The July 19 vote would give shareholders just three days to weigh up Territory's proposal, should an offer be forthcoming on Monday. "I encourage you to contact the ConsMin board and demand that the Pallinghurst scheme meeting be delayed so that you can have the opportunity to assess which proposal is superior," Mr Kiernan wrote in a letter to ConsMin shareholders.

He lashed out at the ConsMin board for what he called a deliberate delaying tactic in the due diligence phase by not releasing ConsMin's unaudited management accounts.

Mr Kiernan, who headed ConsMin for eight years before he was ousted by institutions and powerful board factions, said he expected the accounts to be available just hours before due diligence was scheduled to close.

"I'm pleased to say that so far we have found no unexploded bombs in the ConsMin accounts or legal standing," he said.

"But we wait with bated breath for the new accounts which I believed were supposed to be released today (Thursday).

"It all just adds to the normal demeanour of the board trying to frustrate us. It's an absolute lay-down misere that they are not acting in the best interests of shareholders."

Mr Kiernan also signalled that Territory would maintain the cash component of its indicative offer at $2.00 a ConsMin share - which also comes with one Territory share - if it posts a formal offer, as expected, on Monday.

But he added that the alternative scrip component of three Territory shares for every ConsMin share owned might vary.

A ConsMin spokesman said the unaudited net profit after tax accounts had not been scheduled for release until today and were "within Territory's due diligence period".

He added that because there was only one firm proposal on the table, any call for a delay from Territory could only be considered if another bid was lodged.

"Should an offer be presented to ConsMin by Territory, the directors will consider it and act in the best interest of shareholders," he said.

This bid by TTY's Mr Michael Kiernan, has a personal look about it. If TTY have big plans to supply the Global Steel sector, why on earth would they want to takeover CSM and destroy the lean and mean image of Territory.

If TTY up the stake, now worth about $3.14, TTY stock will tumble.

No doubt in my mind that the Pallinghurst consortium will eventually equal the $2.00 in cash offered by TTY and this will take it past the Kiernan Territory offer.

I think that the timing of the meeting, and the timing of the quarterly that has just come out are very interesting.... most people would have to have sent their proxy forms in by now (if posting) those who can hand deliver or are faxing, still have time to think about the quarterly report... I haven't fully read it yet, but it looks pretty positive to me (as I expected it to be)...

Honestly even with the current management doing virtually nothing, the company is going to be making heaps more money, the Palinghurst offer has always been (and is now even more so) IMO a joke, and the fact that the board even entertained it in the first place is to me almost incomprehensible.

I just hope that enough average shareholders have not been put off by the ream of paper that was presented to them, and have voted no.

Tony.

It is possible that ConsMin management already realise that the pallinghurst deal is dead. Many shareholders have already voted NO, so the writing is on the wall. Baxter may be trying now to push up the share price to stop Michael Kiernans bid. He'll lose his job if TTY get it.
Look at the profit FY07, next year FY08 will be a ripper.
Forget Gilbertson, tell him to go home to the UK or SA, wherever he likes, just don't come here and try and steal our company.

IMO he (and probably the rest of the board) deserve to lose their jobs regardless of any outcome. For them to continually get up and say they have the shareholders interests in mind is incredulous as far as I'm concerned... I bought into CSM last year (not knowing there was a takeover rumour) not because the price was going up, but because I saw massive potential for the company. I didn't realize what a dud management team they had at the time, but I think that they have made that very clear now!!

How could they virtually get up and say that the company needs Palinghurst in order to survive (I know they haven't but it is IMO implied) when there were so many positive things going for them, many of which were IMO known before the Palinghurst discussions even started...

I think if the bid is quashed, the next thing should be for the major shareholders to put a motion forward to sack the board!! Of course they would have to get some decent folks to replace them, but honestly, the company can surely benefit enormously from a change of management.

I'm one shareholder who is completely disgusted by the boards actions, and arrogant disregard for the shareholders, I think the slap in the face when they said (more or less) that shareholders who bought on rumours deserve what they get was the final straw for me, I lost all respect for them at that point, as I bought completely oblivious to any rumours, which the only comment CSM had was no comment. They wanted to keep the price low, why would they do that???

OK enough of a vent for me... I guess we shall see by the end of next week where to next


Tony.

CSM has the only independent high grade Manganese ore deposit close to China, it will mean $200 million profit FY08.
Chrome ore is overlooked by the market, they sold $55 millionFY 07, it could be $80-90 million FY08 as the price has doubled. RSA Cr2O3 42% ore is now at US$270-280/ton FOB.
Why sell now, I bet that we get a good offer on Monday, but it will still not fully represent the true value of ConsMin.
The management should be sacked, they have not looked after shareholder interests.

Rimtalay said:

It is possible that ConsMin management already realise that the pallinghurst deal is dead. Many shareholders have already voted NO, so the writing is on the wall. Baxter may be trying now to push up the share price to stop Michael Kiernans bid. He'll lose his job if TTY get it.
Look at the profit FY07, next year FY08 will be a ripper.
Forget Gilbertson, tell him to go home to the UK or SA, wherever he likes, just don't come here and try and steal our company.

Click to expand...

Nothing dead in the Pallinghurst Consortium Bid, imho, and I believe they will win the day with due patience. If TTY win I will eat all my hats. Mr Kiernan is yesterdays man and is just not big enough to beat the more solid and considerably backed Pallinghurst Consortium; One of which, AMCI, could if they so wished take a tilt on their own.

Having seen so many takeovers by foreign companies of Australian outfits, I doubt it matters that much. CSM are no Woodside Petroleum.

From 8/6/07

noirua said:

Many Aussie Miners are being hit by the strength of the Aussie Dollar against the greenback. It is still my view that an upping of the current offer by 30 to 40 cents should win the day for the threesome.

Click to expand...

Looking back through a few posts, it is funny to see this, then see how Noirua appears to stand firmly in the Pallinghurst camp, talking down CSM valuations, TTY stock and MK as the past and not the future. It was a good call, though, at least from the pricing aspect-Pallinghurst upped its bid by 30c/share on 25/6/07. But the market is currently telling us it is still nowhere near enough.

On 9/6/07 I asked

Sainter said:

Noirua,
Can you please expand on what you mean by development costs when the main increase in revenue is coming from an increase in the price received for manganese?
Cheers!

Click to expand...

I'm still waiting.... That post of course was based on Rimtalay's excellent research regarding manganese pricing and well before CSM came clean about the small matter of a 140% increase in the price of manganese for the September quarter. That result makes any answer to the above question irrelevant, really. Funnily enough, that announcement came out on the same day the Pallinghurst bid was increased. Go figure! Anyway, that strengthens the value of CSM and puts it on track to earn >$40M NPAT in the next QUARTER ALONE, approaching 50% more than the entire 06/07 NPAT. Pricing assumptions are presented below, and highlight where revenue is coming from. Although it might be a bit too much to expect, if that is maintained for the year, CSM would earn >$170M NPAT, putting it on a projected PER of 4.2 @$3.26. Or 77cps, 50% dividend = 38 cps. So on that basis, how does anyone come up with a $1.48 valuation as below, unless it is just scaremongering?

ON 7/7/07

noirua said:

If TTY drops the bid for CSM then the share price may return to $1.48 - that tells the story. Is TTY's effort just a spoiling bid ??????????

Click to expand...

I would welcome a 'sum of parts' approach to justify such a call. I'll start it off-there are those pesky holdings CSM has in other ASX listed companies which were worth 95 cents per CSM share at close on 13/7/07....

A clip in the AFR today also mentioned 'continued talk of another party playing a significant role in the eventual outcome'. None of this adds up to a sub $3 shareprice in my book, let alone sub $2.

Roll on Monday.
Cheers!

Price assumptions for 07/08:
AUS/US 0.855
Mn 1,000,000 t @US$7.25 CIF = 6.25 FOB per dmtu, costs A$2.4/dmtu, to give $236M nett income
Cr 250,000t @US$250/t FOB, costs A$135/t to give $39M nett income.
Ni 5000t @US$35000/t, costs A$8/t, BHP processing fee 35% + sundry, to give $70M nett income.
Admin, finance and selling costs of $96M.

noiura, as I said the Pallinghurst bid is now dead, stone cold dead at the price offered. Obviously if Gilbertson wants to raise the price to $2.50/share plus 2 for 5 share deal, he may get it.
I am privy to many of the larger shareholders intentions as I emailed 100 large holders and posted letters to 300 of the largest holders, and many have responded and told me that they have voted no. These are people with a large stake, and I mean large. These people are not fools, you don't own $1 million in CSM if you're a fool.
So if Gilbertson or Kiernan want CSM they will have to pay the right price and at Gilbo's offer of $1.68/share ( +2 for 5) it is only for idiots.

'ConsMin's minions twigging The Australia

BRIAN Gilbertson is a smart man. At Billiton, he got the better of BHP. Now at Pallinghurst, he's almost got the better of Consolidated Minerals. Almost.

In hand with AMCIf's Connecticut coal baron Hans Mende and South African merchant bank Investec, Gilbertson is offering $2.80 a share for ConsMin. And he's got a board recommendation from ConsMin chairman John Carter. The rub is that ConsMin is worth north of $4 a share and shareholders are twigging to the fact that Pallinghurst's bid is too tricky and too low.

Argo's Rob Patterson and Noble Group's Richard Elman are unlikely to sell. And yesterday, two private ConsMin holders - Glenn Stedman and Keith Barnard - stepped up their "Vote No" campaign, mailing out a note to shareholders.

"Even after tax, the manganese revenue that is locked in for the forthcoming quarter alone will be similar to, if not more than, what CSM will earn during the whole 2006-07 financial year ($33.8 million)," warn Stedman and Barnard. "A 'yes' vote would see you forfeit 60 per cent or more of that."

The dissidents are spot on. Pallinghurst is stumping up just 30c a share for ConsMin's stakes in a swag of developers too: Jabiru, Vital Metals, BC Iron, Mithril Resources and Reed Resources, although they're worth $213 million, or 94c a share.

Expert's uncovered glory

PWC hasn't exactly covered itself in glory either. The independent expert has valued ConsMin at $2.70 a share (range $2.40 to $3). Only a year ago, as expert to ConsMin's Titan acquisition, PWC had priced its client at $2.55 a share (range $2.32 to $2.77).

But in that past year, manganese had shot up from $US2 a pound to $US6.40, chrome ore from $US130 a tonne to $US270 a tonne and nickel from $US7 a pound to $US16. Not only have metals prices more than doubled but ConsMin has enjoyed exploration success, production upgrades and massive price rises as the value of its minority holdings has tripled.

If a Qantas board recommendation was not enough for the Airline Partners Australia private equity consortium, Pallinghurst can hardly bank on an imprimatur from ConsMin directors. Especially while ConsMin founder Michael Kiernan is pitching a higher bid, some $3.60 a share in cash and scrip, from his new plaything Territory Resources. Kiernan was forced out of ConsMin a year ago.

Then there's continuous disclosure. Despite much urging from shareholders, ConsMin was tardy telling the market about the big run-up in manganese prices. Shareholders who sold out at $2.65 a share a few weeks ago have cause to be cross. '

CSM has just put out a "our future looks very promising" announcement. I concur, but WHY has it taken an expected bid from TTY for management to announce this? This was known by myself and others two months ago, when only the (lower) Pallinghurst bid was on the table. Why didn't they put out the same sort of announcement then?

Yes and note how the increase in metals prices has nothing to do with this success according to the CSM management! It is all through their initiatives... what a load of hogwash I say

If you look at previous announcements I'm sure that the last 1/4 they have been getting significantly higher prices for manganese than what they were for the first half year. They are quoting the average manganese price over the entire year, not what it was and what has been lately... making out that they have had NO benefit from increasing manganese prices at this point.... I could have sworn they posted that they were getting a benefit from increased manganese prices before (though they never told us what the prices were, even though in the yearly report last year they stated they would give regular updates on the prices being received....)

They must think that the average shareholder is an idiot!!!

Tony.