In short: The met-coal (steelmaking, not power generation) name Haymaker followed Trader Ferg into back in January 2025 — "a most profitable example" of the variety they're willing to own, since it sidesteps the thermal-coal pollution objection. It "subsequently soared by ~51%, despite having corrected by 20%." Named this week as evidence of the coal group's recent weakness (with BTU) rather than as a fresh recommendation. A carried winner; no new call.
Warrior Met mines "met" coal — metallurgical coal, used to make steel, not to generate electricity. That distinction is why Hay was willing to own it in the first place: it avoids the power-plant-emissions objection that keeps him away from thermal coal. He followed Trader Ferg into it in January 2025, and it rose about 51% even after giving back 20% from its peak.
It's mentioned this week as a marker of how the coal sector has traded recently, not as a new buy. Treat it as a scorecard entry — evidence that Ferg's coal research has paid, which is part of why Hay is willing to back Ferg's Australian names now.
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.