I don't really support an $8 buyout but won't complain if one comes along. I'm still in the mid $3 camp.

$8 becomes more believable when you consider that we have 100% of the properties associated with the BFS being polished up right now PLUS additional lands to explore and cover with tailings or roads should we desire.

TCK can earn-back up to 75% but we have the most important 25%. TCK's first 75% comes pretty cheap (4 x $90M= $360M). The last 25% is critical to TCK. I think TCK will look at the final sum (earn in $ PLUS buyout $) in evaluating how good a deal it can get for the 100% of the SC project.

Borrowing BRoF's calcs and massaging some of the assumptions a bit:

Prefeasibility Study done back in 2008, the before tax NPV, discounted at 8%, was $2.764 billion dollars.

But let's assume TCK earns in for 75% and pays 1/2 of NPV in total (per: Page 67, 4th bullet from the bottom: http://www.scribd.com/doc/16160045/Hard-Rock-Manual-Edition-3)

(1/2)X$2.764 billion = $1.382B <=== is the max that TCK can afford to pay for SC and still have upside for its risk and investment over many years.

If TCK earns in for 75% by spending $360M on the project, it still has $1.022B in its 'budget' to spend on taking out the rest of CUU. (i.e. $1.382B-$360M = $1.022B).

$1.022B divided by 422.1M shares is $2.42 per FD CUU share.

I think our NPV will be much higher than the 2008 PFS. I think $4B NPV(8%) is plausible even with a much larger capex. I'll let folks calculate what that would mean in this valuation approach. Hint how much larger is $4B than $2.764B.

dyodd.