Christo64,

Yes, that's correct! As you said, ..."their plan is to actually develop this into a fully functional mine rather than sell to the highest bidder in the development stage."

I thought Webb summed it up very well about which option is better for Tyhee's share holders when I asked him (and Jim Puplava too),

"Hypothetically speaking, there are two gold exploration and development juniors, both with about a two million ounce resource, both located in North America.
One junior’s avowed endgame is to be bought out within a year. The other’s is to go it alone into production in the next several years. But, it is expected to deliver a bankable economic study and a mine permit within the next twelve months (or so).

Hypothetically speaking,which of the two juniors would have the greater increase in its share price in the next year."

Paraphrased, this is what Webb said,

The options of whether to sell or to develop plays out in these ways:

Selling is quicker, lower risk. A sale would net a lower return (quickly) than what would be available if one were to wait. Whereas developing is slower and riskier, it may net out a higher return, POTENTIALLY A MUCH HIGHER RETURN! Nevertheless, there is always a risk of failure. However, when developing continues, the option to sell remains, even if development fails. In that event, there is a floor under the development. This floor keeps rising as development progresses.

Christo, Your other two questions would make a great Q-call to Jim Puplava:

"What is the prior history for exploration companies to get the funding they need to reach the working mine stage? Or do most of these explorers simply sell out when a big enough buyer comes along?"

If you don't call it in today ( the deadline) maybe I will next week.

Cheers,

Baires