E, it wouldn't be you if you didn't respond with a critique! Good point re resources vs. reserves. Trey suggests the following:

"I use the company’s projections for 2007 production and NI 43-101 reserves. I only use the reserves from producing (or soon to be producing) mines. I use measured and indicated plus 50% of inferred resources."

Because he only uses "producing mines" it really means that SGR's gold production valuation should be close to 0 (if we use the letter of the law)! But, we can have some lattitude on rules here I suspect..

Also, this article was published back in Jan/07 and gold has appreciated a fair amount since then (+/- 30%) so the $3000/$200 numbers may be low for this model when applied today with ~$900 gold.

As I said, mish/mash the numbers any way you wish. My point was that a valuation model should include actual production, not just the "potential to". Enjoy..