A big drop in the price of nickel, a metal used in many things, has caused problems for people who dig it up from the ground (called miners). The price went down because there was too much nickel and not enough people wanting to buy it. This made some miners stop working, fire workers and spend less money on their businesses. A special number that shows how well nickel is doing as an investment (the S&P GSCI Nickel Index) has been going down for a year. The drop was not sudden, but slow and sometimes had small increases that didn't last long. One reason why the price of nickel goes up and down so much is because when it is expensive, people start to use more recycled nickel instead of digging new ones. This makes the demand for new nickel lower and the price drops again. Read from source...

1. The title is misleading and sensationalized, implying that nickel miners are in a dire situation when the reality is more complex and nuanced. A 40% drop is significant but not catastrophic for an industry that has experienced fluctuations before.
2. The article focuses on the negative aspects of the supply and demand imbalance, while ignoring the positive implications for consumers and recyclers. Lower prices may benefit some end-users and encourage more sustainable practices in the long run.
3. The author uses vague terms like "wreaking havoc" and "havoc in the nickel mining industry" without providing concrete evidence or data to support these claims. What does havoc mean exactly? How is it measured? Who is suffering the most?
4. The article relies on a single index, the S&P GSCI Nickel Index, to illustrate the market trend, without acknowledging its limitations and potential biases. The index is not comprehensive or representative of the global nickel market, as it only includes spot prices of primary producers in China and Indonesia.
5. The article quotes an expert who seems to have a conflicting interest, as he works for a mining research consultancy that may stand to gain from negative publicity about the industry. His opinion is not balanced or objective, as he only offers one perspective and does not consider alternative scenarios or solutions.