Hello Fishercat.

Please take note, in paragraph seven (of the nine), just before all the Magpie calculations, I qualified those following numbers as representing only our 46.72 percent share of Magpie (not as representing Magpie in its entirety). Therefore, we’re even better than “the area north of $20 per share” (as you put it).

The way I think of $8.65 billion is to compare billions with millions. Our market cap is less than $8.65 million (approximately $6.75 million). Of course, one billion is one thousand times more than one million. To be exact, $8.65 billion is 1,281 times greater than $6.75 million. So, take the pennies of our share price and make them dollars. Then multiply by 12.81.

Do take note, the Magpie metal content table I posted earlier today did contain one typo (Chromium “$4,82” should be Chromium “$4,802”). However, I typed in the correct totals. So, the typo has nothing to do with any of the arithmetic and does not change the total Magpie resource of CAN$8.65 billion.

Now, let’s take a step backwards and think about the meaning behind the quantities of the Magpie ore components. The raw numbers do not tell us everything. Far from it. Besides that, as I pointed out in my posts last year, I have zero expertise in metallurgy. However, the raw numbers are a valid way to begin the conversation. Within them, we find that they contain a valid logic all of their own. And they speak volumes. Let’s think and talk about what the ore constituent quantities tell us, purely in terms of simple common sense and purely in terms of making simple comparisons.

When a property has more than one saleable metal in its mineral resources—in the NI-43-101 and in the general description of it—the word “equivalent” is typically used. For example, when Gold is the main metal but significant Silver is also present, the description will not only be in terms of ounces of Gold; it will also contain Gold “equivalent ounces.” The same applies when the nature of the property is determined by other metals, such as “equivalent pounds” of Copper, when significant Zinc or Lead is present besides Copper, the primary metal.

It’s always the same very simple and very basic straight arithmetic. There’s no bells and whistles. Take the market price of one metal and multiply or divide it (as appropriate) by the market price of the other. For example, Gold presently is US$1,396.20 per (troy) ounce; Silver is US$23.44 per (troy) ounce. So you need approximately 60 ounces (59.56 to be exact) of Silver to get one Gold equivalent ounce.

Of course, the same principle applies even when the initial units of measure are different. For example, in a Gold property where Copper is the secondary metal, it takes 431 pounds (not ounces) of Copper (at US$3.2395) to get one Gold equivalent ounce.

So, where does that leave us? Because Gold (in terms of both its quantity and price) is so much more familiar and better understood than Titanium, I suggest we think of our Magpie’s resources in terms of their Gold equivalents. Our 46.72 percent share of Magpie resources follows:

Titanium (TiO2) = 48.58 million tonnes = 491,819,438 Gold equivalent ounces
Chromium (Cr2O3) = 11.23 million tonnes = 38,623,736 Gold equivalent ounces
Vanadium (V2O5) = 1.34 million tonnes = 50,079,645 Gold equivalent ouncesIron (Fe2O3) = 260.73 million tonnes = 24,958,146 Gold equivalent ounces
Our Magpie resources (46.72%) = 605.48 million Gold equivalent ounces

The way the arithmetic works, for example for TiO2, is you take the $686,678,300,000 total raw market price (of our Magpie 46.72 percent) and divide by the $1,396.20 troy ounce price of Gold.