I know that TeTsuo has addressed the IA report prepared by Kiril Mugerman that compares FMS & NGC and concludes that NGC is the better graphite play. This report can be found at http://www.energyandcapital.com/reports/IAS%20-%201%20Nov.%202012.pdf

TeTsuo has pointed out several "inconsistensies" in the report - I'm trying to be diplomatic here  without calling them lies - and I am just not smart enough to understand it all in the detail that TeTsuo and others can comprehend it all. But something alse has been bothering me ...it's the "non-response" to this IA analysis ... Shouldn't FMS respond in some way to the claims in this document? Why not? What are the options that FMS has:

(1) Do not respond because the report is accurate and Mugerman's claims are all true - Jeeez ... I hope this is not the case ... we are all screwed in that case, and I am much poorer as a result. Not a happy outcome.

(2) Do not respond because it is obvious to everyone who reads it that this analysis is worthless ... well, I certainly hope the anlaysis is incorrect, but assuming that anyone can see this is not a helpful thing for us with skin in the game - I think soneone from FMS needs to step up and say something to refute this analysis if, in fact, it is malarky. But the tricky thing is that if FMS decides to speak up, they need to provide evidence to support their refutation.

(3) Respond quickly (but not very forcefully - i.e. no proof) to the claims ... I am glad they are not doing this as it would be the worst response possible ... interpreted by the market that the emperor has no clothes and lead to a long slide in SP.

(3) Respond quickly and forcefully with proof that refutes the claims in this report ... well perhaps they cannot do this either without violating some non-disclosure commitments ... I "hope" this is true.

(3) Do not respond because there is news on the near horizon (e.g. offtake news) that will refute the overall argument in this report (i.e. that NGC rather than FMS is King) ... well that would be very nice and I hope this comes to pass - and sooner than 2-3 years doen the road ... but why not respond anyway if this is the case and just say that news is coming that will refute this report without disclosing what it will be. Is FMS so "worried" about the recent MCTO and the scrutiny of the Securities Commission that they just don't want to say something that might bring more heat ... or is any "helpful news" just too darn far away to be helpful. I hope not.

(4) Do not respond because some other analyst will do it for us all ... with a report that sets things straight. Well TeTsuo has tried to do this ... but he is not claiming to be an analyst and what gets said on this board is not going to sway anyone in the same way an IA report will do. I certainly do not see any "white knight" analyst stepping up to slay the IA dragon for us. In fact, all I see is exactly the opposite. And that worries me ... quite a bit actually. 

Can anyone on this board say something helpful in regard to all of this? Something more thoughtful than "Why don't you contact GE with your questions?"