First, Kudos on starting a discussion on the topic. Second, I acknowledge both the article and my response necessarily reduce arguments that are more complex into simpler forms. However, if the conclusion is that country risk and ratings are to blame for most companies chasing the same few projects, I believe it comes way too short. We all know risk ratings have serious flaws and rely too much on past performance. The US and Japan have worse macro situations than many developing countries with worse ratings, and one could even argue more stable and predictable political situation (at least for the US). And what about investors just chasing increasingly untennable rates of return? I think the Carnegies and Rockefellers really risked their capital and made it work, whereas today it seems as though investors want those same rates of return, but with all guarantees. And thirdly, if the business is almost proven to succeed, why shouldnt the government, with its ability to get longer-term debt, finance and keep a majority stake in the projects, while contracting out the parts that the private sector is better suited to do (like build, and perhaps operate?