My opinions and explanation:
We should no longer use the 10 million ton ore quantity for Eagle. From what we know already that amount is there for sure. 15 is a more realistic estimate today, and that 20 is what we will likely end up with. This I base on what we know or may be confident of.

As for the 10% 'in situ' = devaluation of gross assets in ground to today, I consider that
percentage to be applicable to assets that have been competely defined with an final NI43-101, feasibility study and environmental assesment done and major permits in place.
No, today I assign a discount to 5% because we are no way done with exploring and the above mentioned requirements are still to come.
I shuld have labeled earlier 'Other Ni' as 'Other metals' other than chromium and gold.
At12 nickel grade, some of it could come up only in the one percent grade, that does not
necessarily spell disaster. One would need many holes on which to form a decision. Even at Eagles not all holes are spectacular. Dry holes or poor ones do not make a resource but only the economical ones. There is no guarantee that first holes reported on are of the better variety.

Indirect infrastructure such as road or rail adds nothing to our value but in only takes away if absent from what value we have. I now assign a depreciation due to their absence of about half, or in reverse view, later a doubling in price due to their certainty of delivery.

I presently guesstimate that the native issue and the market malaise, each contributes about a dollar as discount to our share price. Hence $3.50-2.00=$1.50. Should either of these correct we should see these corresponding price rises. At least that is how I explain to myself as to what the major investors are pricing at.

"Blue Sky" is percieved potential but it has no real dollar value to it, imo. Yes I theoretically assign to it between 5 and 10 dollars but it incorporates all the potential of the yet undiscovered land claim, potential spectacular drill results and a buy out by a "Biggie".

waxweazle: Our curent price is no proxy, it is the real price, nothing more nor less.

If there is a proxy I suggest the FWR buyout as one. If Cliffs were willing to pay four times the price of what FWR was worth before the offers surfaced then it is very reasonable for us to assume that we could be offered a price 4 times our real price what ever it may be at the time.