"It has to do with the level of preparedness/confirmation of the project. Look how the numbers changed for SC through these same stages. The more steps up the ladder (boxes checked off) the more value per pound in the ground. SC for example has great grades open at depth, but the FS determined the pit couldn't be deep enough to recover them so they were removed. We have a district sized resource around the FS area, but the value wasn't included because it didn't have the required confirmation.

If it was just about an RE and we are worth 10% of that, why did we take SC all the way to FS? Valuations for all jr explorers would be much different if that was the case. For example, with SC our value will jump further with a road, an EA or a production decision (more boxes ticked off). Pounds in the ground didn't change but value would?

For VD, for example:

• Historical RE, 1.2 billion lbs. We bought for a couple million, neighbors passed on it.
• We drill and prove it up enough for a RE -> value/lb increases
• We complete a PEA (less risk now) -> value/lb increases further
• EA or permitting (even less risk) -> value/lb increases again
• Successful full scale test of the in-situ leaching -> value/lb even better
• Full blown FS (proof it can be mined, how much cost, expected recoveries, etc. ie: SC level of study) -> most value/lb.

I agree with you - cost/lb for extraction is a massive factor (and part of the FS level of study). I just don't think the equation for valuation is as simple

I'm not saying all these are needed to sell, but the selling price will reflect the stage of preparedness we take it to. I hope RE or PEA is enough - lets flip this thing?"

I think you completly missed what I said. I was defending the previous evaluation because that is exactly what we did on the SC one (this method. not others). It was Value = LBS of copper * Copper price / shares * percent of project owned (if applicable). This valuation which was done and what we were discussing has abosolutly nothing to do with the FS or PFS

Below is the portion from nopoo2's post earlier on Dec 08

""Proven and Probable Reserve of 940.8 million tonnes grading 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% molybdenum and 1.72 g/t silver; with contained metal of 5,611.7 million pounds of copper, 5.8 million ounces of gold, 363.5 million pounds of molybdenum and 51.7 million ounces of silver."

Theres $16 billion worth of just copper at todays spot. CUU owns 25% of that. 414,000,000 shares osfd.

25% of $16b = $4b

10% of $4b = $400m / 414m osfd = .96"

As you can see, this is 100% based on the RE numbers and has no information to do with a PFS and FS. This was a simple valuation we were looking at which was 10% of the resource.

Now of course I agree that no one would be paying the 10% unless you know what the rest of the equation would cost. I believe SC cost is around $1.00/lb, ill just use that for now. So you paid $0.30 per pound, then your costs, $1.30, at $3.00/lb copper they are making $1.70/lb on 25% of the copper and $2.00/lb on the other 75% of the copper. As we don't know the same on VD, you can't pin down the % that might be paid as we don't know what it costs to produce, but assuming (probably a very small assumption) that the cost at VD is lower than SC to produce, 10% is fine. We can revise this simple evaluation when the new RE is presented.