I have been told that Cliffs figures, as quoted, include all infrastructure cost, including for transport and a smelter.

These figures are lower than my own previous assumptions, which have included much higher costs for a rail line, and did not include capital costs for a smelter.

My own figure for capital is around $1.5 Billion.

CLF has stated that they expect all capital costs together to be around $800 million.

They do not give a figure for expected returns, other than post-smelter.

My assumption ( based on earlier statements by Canada Chrome) has been that some ore will be exported directly as chromite. CLF has recently said they will process all of their projected '1 to 2 million tons per year' into ferrochrome.

I had calculated returns based on a ferrochrome price of $300 per ton, and not including a post-smelter return.

I must assume CLF knows their business better than I do. Therefore I use their figures.

As to the NOT figures, those were fairly recently told to me by Glorieux. I must assume he knows NOTs business better than I do.

If we use CLF figures, they expect a gross return of $1.4billion per year.

I have assumed low costs for mining, but transport (tons per mile) and smelter operation costs must come off to give a net figure. I have taken that figure as 50% of the gross, or around $700 million per year. Every year for 30 years.

Using Glorieux figures for NOT, Eagle1a is expected to yield a gross return of $1.7 billion. Total. Net Return was given as $700 million. Total. Over, I believe, 5 years. Including costs for a smelting or refining operation for the lower grade ore.

From those figures, it would seem that one year of production of FWR chromite, smelted, before deduction of capital, interest etc, gives a Net Return equal to the entire Net Return from Eagle 1a.

If we assume some cost overruns, then capital could be repaid during the first two years of production by CLF. That leaves 28 years of production with a net return of $700million per year.

Eagle1b and c are possibly equal to E1a. On that assumption, and if costs are at least close to the same, then Eagle1a,b&c together might give a total net return of $2.1 billion, or equal to 3 years of CLF's figure for the FWR deposits(after the first 2 years)

By those figures, returns for the chromite will be far greater than for Eagle 1

Please, if you disagree with these figures, post your own numbers, and not just a statement that the figures above are wrong.