ZeroHedge66%

Tungsten Miner Soars After Billionaire Forrest Takes 17% Stake 74%

By Tyler Durden61%

7/20/2026, 1:05:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 11 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Anecdotal, and Post Hoc (False Cause), with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 30.6% saturation with 71 hits. Analysis detected 332 faulty-reasoning hits from 232 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 67.1% and a BS Rank of 74% (4,937 of 18,798 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.70% of the article peer group.

Australian mining billionaire Andrew Forrest, founder and executive chairman of iron ore giant Fortescue, has agreed to acquire Oaktree Capital's entire 16.8% stake in the Sydney-listed tungsten producer EQ Resources. 
Shares of EQ Resources in Sydney surged 34% on Monday following news of the transaction, which is valued at about 190 million AUD ($133 million) based on Friday's close. 
The deal covers 862.1 million shares and 35.6 million options. 
Forrest's most likely reasoning for the deal is that EQ Resources controls one of the largest operating tungsten platforms outside China. 
Tungsten is a critical metal used in armor-piercing munitions, aerospace components, cutting tools, electronics, and semiconductor manufacturing. 
Bloomberg noted that, outside of China, Australia has the world's largest tungsten reserves, accounting for about 80% of global production. 
Prices of tungsten in Europe reached a new all-time high of $3,025 per ton after a year-long rally, following Beijing's decision to place certain tungsten products on its export control list. 
Beyond China, stockpiling has accelerated and war demand is driving a squeeze in physical markets. 
George Heppel, vice president of commodity research, told Bloomberg earlier this year: "In my 12 years working across the commodity space and dealing with a lot of weird and wonderful metals, I have never seen a market as tight as tungsten is right now, aside from maybe lithium in 2021." 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
6.5%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
30.6%
Framing Effect
3.9%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
9.1%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
3.9%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
30.2%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
6.5%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
13.4%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
21.6%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
8.6%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
9.1%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

232 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.