ZeroHedge72%

Tungsten Miner Soars After Billionaire Forrest Takes 17% Stake 75%

By Tyler Durden63%

7/20/2026, 6:05:00 AM

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 75% (5,482 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 75.00% 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." 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 7.7%ZeroHedge: 7.8%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.6%ZeroHedge: 1.6%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 6.5%Tyler Durden: 4.6%ZeroHedge: 4.6%Availability Heuristic6.5%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.1%ZeroHedge: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 30.6%Tyler Durden: 2.8%ZeroHedge: 2.9%Overconfidence Bias30.6%This article: 3.9%Tyler Durden: 10.8%ZeroHedge: 10.8%Framing Effect3.9%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.5%ZeroHedge: 0.5%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.0%ZeroHedge: 2.1%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 3.7%ZeroHedge: 3.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 11.1%ZeroHedge: 11.1%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 9.1%Tyler Durden: 1.1%ZeroHedge: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error9.1%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.2%ZeroHedge: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.3%ZeroHedge: 1.3%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.0%ZeroHedge: 1.0%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 3.9%Tyler Durden: 0.8%ZeroHedge: 0.8%Halo Effect3.9%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 3.2%ZeroHedge: 3.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.4%ZeroHedge: 1.4%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.6%ZeroHedge: 0.6%Straw Man0.0%This article: 30.2%Tyler Durden: 6.2%ZeroHedge: 6.2%Appeal to Authority30.2%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.2%ZeroHedge: 2.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.4%ZeroHedge: 2.4%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.3%ZeroHedge: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 6.5%Tyler Durden: 6.7%ZeroHedge: 6.7%Hasty Generalization6.5%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.8%ZeroHedge: 0.8%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 5.1%ZeroHedge: 5.1%Appeal to Emotion0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.5%ZeroHedge: 1.5%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 13.4%Tyler Durden: 5.4%ZeroHedge: 5.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)13.4%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.7%ZeroHedge: 0.7%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.4%ZeroHedge: 0.4%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 21.6%Tyler Durden: 2.2%ZeroHedge: 2.2%Anecdotal21.6%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.6%Tyler Durden: 2.7%ZeroHedge: 2.7%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.6%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.0%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.1%ZeroHedge: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.2%ZeroHedge: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 4.1%ZeroHedge: 4.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.9%ZeroHedge: 1.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.1%Tyler Durden: 11.2%ZeroHedge: 11.2%Biased Writer Voice9.1%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 1.5%ZeroHedge: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.5%ZeroHedge: 0.5%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 2.8%ZeroHedge: 2.8%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Tyler Durden: 0.9%ZeroHedge: 0.9%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

232 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers30%attributed speech162writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageBloomberg • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageGeorge Heppel • 50 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

George Heppel

100%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words71% of attributed speech47% writer coverage
0%7.5%15.0%Biased Writer Voice-13.0 ptsWriter: 13.0%George Heppel: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

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