An article published by the Financial Times titled “Apple to name and shame suppliers of conflict minerals” (February 13, 2014) describes Apple’s “supplier responsibility” report. Given the Dodd-Frank bill’s requirement to track use of conflict materials, Apple plans to use the electronics industry companies that use around 50% of the tantalum mined, to drive supplier compliance. Rather than source from a couple of certified suppliers, the company claims that it wants to increase compliance in the smelter supply base by listing compliance certified suppliers. Given that the electronics industry is a much smaller user of gold, tungsten etc, do you expect the approach used for tantalum can be expanded to other minerals ? Will Apple’s reports generate spillover benefits for other competitors or will it increase Apple’s negotiating power by having more possible suppliers ? Will the need to track supply sources increase costs to the point that smaller smelters will be uncompetitive ?