With all due respect, there have been quite a number of views expressed on this forum as well as FWR's re the relative values offered by both NOT and Cliffs for FWR's assets. Lets now examine how critical it is to each suitor to succeed.

Cliffs

Cliffs' only interest is for the chromite deposits. It's entry into the ferrochrome market, at least in NA, is an excellent strategic fit to its existing businesses. I believe it has an advantage for a number of reasons.......it has an existing customer base in the steel industry in the US, it is an experienced open pit miner and it is an American company whose government considers ferrochrome as a strategic commodity and which will probably be prepared to support/encourage a domestic source. There are no other chromite deposits comparable in size and quality presently known in NA outside the ROF. The NA ferrochrome market alone is worth several $B annually. If Cliffs secures FWR's chromite deposits, their potential size would supply their projected production capacity for 10's of years. They would not need NOT's chromite deposits. Failure to secure FWR's chromite deposits essentially eliminates them as a potential ferrochrome producer for any market and they will forgo several $B annually in revenue and to gain a significant, perhaps once in a lifetime, ROI opportunity.

NOT

NOT's interest is primarly FWR's chromite deposits. It does not presently possess the resources to enter the ferrochrome market. It is a junior exploration company, not an existing producer with deep pockets. It is opportunistic and is attempting to consolidate control over the chromite deposits in the ROF in order to increase the overall attractiveness of these deposits to another party, whether it be Cliffs, Xstrata, Vale or otherwise. Failure to acquire Cliffs will essentially render the value of NOT's own chromite deposits questionable.

FWR

Clearly has no intention of developing their chromite deposits......desires to remain a junior exploration company. Their chromite deposits remain a most significant corporate asset. Their BOD continues to recommend Cliffs' offer over NOT's.

Their does not appear to be a consensus, based on numerous posts both on the NOT and FWR forums, as to which bid offers FWR shareholders the "best" value. IMO neither offers "maximum" value. My reasoning is as follows. At present, both NOT and FWR are candidates for a take-overs, however, the market has really only given a miniscule value to their chromite deposits in either's SP. Hence, separate take-overs of each can never result in a "maximum" value to shareholders for either. A single take-over of a company controlling the consolidated chromite deposits in the ROF is the only obvious, at least to me, means to extract "maximum" value for all shareholders. If NOT and FWR can come to an amicable agreement, it would then be in the best interests of shareholders of both in both the present and longer term.

Respectfully submitted

geoprof